JUDGMENT Anil Kshetarpal, J. - The landowners, while filing appeals under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1894 Act') pray for the modification of the award dated 22.02.2017 passed by the Reference Court (hereinafter referred to as 'the RC'). The notification under Section 4, 6 and the awards passed by the Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred to as 'the LAC') as well as by the RC are common. The learned counsels representing the parties are ad-idem that this batch of appeals can be decided by a common judgment. 2. The relevant particulars of the case are as under:- 1. Notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act 11.01.2010 For setting up industrial Model Township, Phase-3, Rohtak, to be planned and developed as integrate complex for industrial, transport, Section 30-C, Sector 30-D, Sector 31-C and other utilities in village Kharawar, Tehsil & District Rohtak. 2. Declaration under Section 4 of the 1894 Act 10.01.2011. 3. Award No.19, under Section 11 of the 1894 Act. 04.01.2013 Land measuring 2332 kanals 3 Marlas 4 Assessment of the market value Rs.36,89,900/- per acre. 5. Assessment by the RC 12.04.2018 All the references were dismissed. 3. For the purpose of describing the potential and location of the land, the pleadings of the landowners, with respect to acquired land located in villages Kheri Sadh, Balyana and Kharawar, being common, are extracted as under:- "The appellants claim that the acquired land is located near National Highway No.10 Rohtak-Delhi Road, Asthal Bohar and various hotels, banquet halls, Tilyar Lake are adjacent to the acquired land. Various educational institutions, namely, Baba Mast Nath College of Engineering, Eye Hospital, Ayurvedic College, College of Pharmacy, College of Physiotherapy, Shri Baba Mast Nath Residential Public School, Indus Public School, DAV Public School, and DAV Centary Public School, Rohtak, are located nearby. The residential colonies, namely, The Government Employees Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., Sun City Projects and Omex Project, Parsavnath Builder and Sector 27 are also located close by. The acquired land is surrounded by residential colonies and as such the price of the acquired land is not less than Rs. 5 crore per acre. The residential colonies, namely, The Government Employees Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., Sun City Projects and Omex Project, Parsavnath Builder and Sector 27 are also located close by. The acquired land is surrounded by residential colonies and as such the price of the acquired land is not less than Rs. 5 crore per acre. It is also claimed that in village Balyana previously the land has been acquired for setting up Industrial Model Township Phase- 1 and II, where various big industrial concern like Asian Paints, Maruti Testing and Research Central, National Highway NO.71-A and Foodwear Institute have come up. The acquired land is situated within the National Capital Region and falls within the limits of Municipal Corporation, Rohtak. Maharishi Dayanand University and Pandit B.D.Sharma PGIMS, Rohtak, are at a short distance and religious places like Hanuman Mandir, Sainath Temple, Radha Soami Trust are situated near the acquired land." 4. On appreciation of the pleadings, the RC culled out the following issues:- "(1) What was the market value of the acquired land at the time of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894?OPP (2) Whether the petitioners are entitled to any amount as enhanced compensation as alleged, if so, to what extent?OPP (3) Whether the present petitions are not maintainable?OPR (4) Whether the petitioners have got no locus standi to file the present petitions?OPR (5) Whether the present petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary party and mis-joinder of unnecessary party?OPR (6) Whether the petitions are barred by limitation, as per the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963?OPR (7) Relief." 5. ORAL AND DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 5. ORAL EVIDENCE PRODUCED BY THE LANDOWNERS PW1 Neeraj PW2 Jitender Malik PW3 Jai Bhagwan, WBM in the office of sub-Registrar, Sampla, PW4 Yudhvir PW5 Om Parkash 5.2 DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE PRODUCED BY THE LANDOWNERS (APART FROM THE SALE DEEDS DETAILS WHEREOF ARE GIVEN IN PARA 5.5) Ex. Award No.23, dated 20.12.2013 with respect to acquisition of 13 acres 7 kanals and 16 marla of land in village Kharawar under National Higwhays Act vide prelimianry notification dated 14.12.2011 while assessing the market value of the land @ Rs.66,00,000/- per acres. Ex.PY The lay out plan. Award No.23, dated 20.12.2013 with respect to acquisition of 13 acres 7 kanals and 16 marla of land in village Kharawar under National Higwhays Act vide prelimianry notification dated 14.12.2011 while assessing the market value of the land @ Rs.66,00,000/- per acres. Ex.PY The lay out plan. 5.3 ORAL EVIDENCE PRODUCED BY THE HSIIDC On the other hand, the HSIIDC examined RW1 Krishan Kumar Patwari 5.4 DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE PRODUCED BY THE HSIIDC APART FROM THE SALE DEEDS DETAILS WHEREOF ARE PROVIDED IN PARA 5.5) Ex.R1 Resolution authorizing Patwari to appear in evidence Ex.R6 Policy of the State of Haryana specifying incentive to for no litigation and providing for resettlement and rehabilitation of oustee lanowners Ex.R7 Supplementary award passed by the LAC on 08.11.2013 while assessing the market value of building/structure/tubewell and trees. Ex.R8 Resolution of the Board of Directors of the HSIIDC of village and Skill Development. Ex.R9 Minutes of meeting of Divisional Level Price Fixation Committee dated 16.12.2012. Ex.R12 Minutes of meeting of Divisional Level Price Fixation Committee held on 28.12.2012. Ex.R11 Layout plan identifying the location of the various sale exemplar Ex.R13 RC's award dated 22.02.2017 with respect to acquisition of acquired land in village Balyana vide common notification. 5.5 In order to determine the market value of the acquired land on the basis of comparable sale method, the most important evidence is the sale exemplars produced by the parties. For brevity and convenience, the information of the various sale deeds produced by the respective parties has been compiled in a table which is extracted as under:- 6 ANALYSIS OF THE AWARD PASSED BY RC 6.1 The RC after noticing that the sale exemplars Ex.P1 is same as Ex.P8, Ex.P2 is equivalent to Ex.P12, Ex.P3 is the same as Ex.P10, whereas Ex.P7 is equivalent to Ex.P11, held that Ex.P1 and Ex.P2 are with respect to the period which is much prior to the date of assessment i.e. 10.01.2010 and therefore, cannot be made basis to assess the market value of the acquired land. Thereafter, the court noticed that sale exemplars Ex.P6, Ex.P7 and Ex.P9 are subsequent to the date of assessment i.e. 10.01.2010 and hence, not found reliable for assessing the market value. Thereafter, the Court proceeded to calculate the average price per acre of sale exemplar Ex.P3, P4 and P5 and arrived at a figure of Rs.56,76,910/-. Thereafter, the court noticed that sale exemplars Ex.P6, Ex.P7 and Ex.P9 are subsequent to the date of assessment i.e. 10.01.2010 and hence, not found reliable for assessing the market value. Thereafter, the Court proceeded to calculate the average price per acre of sale exemplar Ex.P3, P4 and P5 and arrived at a figure of Rs.56,76,910/-. The Court after taking into consideration that these sale instances are relating to the small parcels of land, applied deduction of 35% and consequently, arrived at a figure of Rs.36,89,900/- per acre. The sale exemplars Ex.R2 to Ex.R5 produced by the HSIIDC were ignored on the ground that these are reflecting lesser value than the amount assessed by the LAC therefore, cannot be taken into account in view of the bar contained in Section 25 of the 1894 Act. The Court also refused to rely upon the judgment Ex.R13 passed with respect to village Balyana as the location of the acquired land in both villages is different. 7. ARGUMENTS ADDRESSED BY THE LEARNED COUNSELS FOR BOTH THE PARTIES 7.1 This Bench has heard the learned counsels for the parties at length and with their able assistance perused the file along with its record which was requisitioned. 7.2 The learned counsel representing the landowners while drawing the attention of the Court to the judgment passed in RFA NO.3447 of 2019 (Haryana State Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation and another vs. Raj Singh and others) decided on 29.10.2019 contends that the various appeals filed by the HSIIDC out of the same acquisition challenging the common award passed by the RC on 12.04.2018 have already been dismissed. They further contend that the award passed by the RC is liable to be modified as the court has erred in taking out the average price reflected in these sale deeds and thereafter, applying deduction at the rate of 35%. They contend that the sale exemplars Ex.P3, Ex.P4 and Ex.P5 are comparable sale instances and therefore, the landowners are entitled to enhancement. 7.3 Per contra, the learned counsel for the HSIIDC has contended that the RC has committed an error while ignoring sale exemplar Ex.R2 to Ex.R5. He further contends that the reliance placed by the RC on Ex.P3 is wrong because it is with respect to a constructed building along with the land. 7.3 Per contra, the learned counsel for the HSIIDC has contended that the RC has committed an error while ignoring sale exemplar Ex.R2 to Ex.R5. He further contends that the reliance placed by the RC on Ex.P3 is wrong because it is with respect to a constructed building along with the land. While referring to the layout plan Ex.R11, the learned counsel contends that the sale exemplars Ex.R3, Ex.R4 and Ex.P6 are with respect to the acquired land, whereas the sale exemplar Ex.P4 is located on the National Highway and Ex.P5 represents parcels of land located at a distance. Hence, he contends that no modification is required. 8. DISUCSSION BY THE COURT On a careful analysis of the exemplar sale deeds, it is evident that sale exemplar Ex.P1, Ex.P8 and Ex.P2, Ex.P12 are with respect to the parcels of land purchased for constructing Radha Soami Satsang Ghar (Religious place for congregation). These parcels of land are located on the Rohtak-Delhi Road National Highway. Ex.P3 is with respect to a constructed building of a factory. In the sale deed, it is specifically recorded that the land along with a building is being sold. Ex.P4 is a sale deed through which a trust purchased the property which is located on the National Highway. This parcel of land is also abutting the acquired land. Ex.P5 is a sale instance with respect to land which appears to be located at a distance because the acquired land is comprised in Rect. No.7, 8, 22, 23, 32, 33, 34, 35, 44, 45,47,48, 61, 62, whereas the land in sale instance Ex.P5 is comprised in Rect. No.1. Ex.P6 is a sale instance of 4 kanals and 16 marlas of plot purchased by a Mayana Educational Society. This sale deed is from land comprised in Rect. No.62 which is near the acquired land. However, from the perusal of the layout plan, it is evident that this parcel of land is located on the National Highway. Ex.P7 which is equivalent to Ex.P11 is again with regard to the sale of a building. Location of Ex.P9 is at a distance from the acquired land. On the other hand, sale instance Ex.R4 and Ex.R5 are with respect to the acquired land. Ex.P7 which is equivalent to Ex.P11 is again with regard to the sale of a building. Location of Ex.P9 is at a distance from the acquired land. On the other hand, sale instance Ex.R4 and Ex.R5 are with respect to the acquired land. From the aforesaid discussion, it is evident that the land located on the National Highway appears to be comparatively higher priced as compared to the land in the interiors on away from the National Highway. From sale deeds Ex.P1, Ex.P2, Ex.P4 and Ex.P62, it is evident that the sale price of the land on the National Highway is higher. If we work out the sale price of the land on the basis of Ex.P6 which has been purchased by Mayana Educational Society, it would come to Rs.35,00,000/- per acre. On the other hand, if we rely upon Ex.P2 which is sale instance of more than 4 acres of land, the per acre price of the land comes to Rs.47,99,941/-. Through sale deed Ex.P2, a parcel of land upto the depth of 21/2 acre from the National Highway has been purchased. This sale instance is of approximately 21/2 years before the notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act. However, the parcel of land is purchased for religious congregation and has a good connectivity. There is a curve on the National Highway and the land is located in the corner of the curve. 8.2 Now let's examine the arguments of the learned counsel representing the parties. The first argument is with regard to the development cut of 35%. In Jai Singh vs.State of Haryana and others (RFA No.3000 of 2021), the Court, after discussing the various judgments of the Court, has held that if a comparable sale instance has been produced with respect to the contemporaneous period, the development cut should not be applied. However, in the present case, the sale deeds of the land located on the National Highway are scanty. The location of the parcels of land sold through the sale deeds Ex.P1, Ex.P2 and Ex.P4 is on the National Highway. The sale instance Ex.P6 also appears to be located on the National Highway. The land in sale deed Ex.P6 as well as Ex.R3 has been purchased by the same Society. The Society while purchasing land measuring 22 kanals and 7 marlas comprised in Rect. No.62, Khasra No.5/1 and 5/2, Rect. No.46, Khasra No.25 and Rect. The sale instance Ex.P6 also appears to be located on the National Highway. The land in sale deed Ex.P6 as well as Ex.R3 has been purchased by the same Society. The Society while purchasing land measuring 22 kanals and 7 marlas comprised in Rect. No.62, Khasra No.5/1 and 5/2, Rect. No.46, Khasra No.25 and Rect. No.47, Khasra No.21/1/ and 21/2 has paid Rs.36,32,000/- which works out to Rs.13,45,000/- per acre. 9. DISCUSSION 9.1 Keeping in view the aforesaid discussion, while relying upon the sale instance Ex.P12, some kind of development cut is required to be applied because the land purchased for religious congregation has to be of prime are and not only agricultural land. Accordingly, after applying cut at the rate of 20%, the market value of the land upto the depth of 2 acres on the National Highway is re-assessed @ Rs.38,40,000/- per acre (rounded figure). Whereas, with respect to the remaining land which is beyond the depth of 2 acres, the award passed by the RC is maintained, particularly when the appeals filed by HSIIDC have already been dismissed vide judgment in RFA No.3447 of 2019, decided on 29.10.2019 (HSIIDC vs. Raj Singh and Others). 9.2 With these modifications, the judgment of the RC is upheld. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also disposed of.