JUDGMENT : H.P.Sandesh, J. Heard appellant counsel for the appellant and the learned Additional Government Advocate learned counsel for the respondent. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant in his argument would vehemently contend that 4(1) notification in respect of this appeal was issued on 18.11.2005 and 6(1) final notification was passed on 06.07.2006. The counsel also would submit the respondent herein passed impugned award awarding total compensation of Rs.6,51,605/- in respect of the property of the claimant herein consisting of commercial building acquired to the extent of 252 square feet out of total extent of 777 square feet. The counsel would submit that notice of award was served upon the appellant on 30.06.2008 as contemplated under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984. The payment of award was also made on 28.08.2008 and application was also filed for enhancement under Section 18(1) on 22.09.2008 which is numbered as LAC No.50/2000 and impugned judgment in LAC No.50/2000 was passed by the Reference Court on 16.08.2013 fixing the amount of Rs.2,500/- per square and the same was challenged in LAC (Appeal) No.261/2016 and the same was partly allowed vide order dated 09.07.2019 enhancing the compensation to Rs.3,000/- per square feet. Being aggrieved by the said judgments, the present miscellaneous first appeal is filed before this Court 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would contend that the award amount passed by the authority is meager and contend that award passed in LAC as well as LAC (appeal) are very meager. The counsel would further contend that in respect of the very same notification, when an amount of Rs.7,000/- has been passed as award in LAC No.28/2010 disposed of on 07.10.2014 in respect of the similar property which is situated at B.M. Road, Bangalore-Mangalore Road at Hassan which was also acquired under the same notification, this Court directed learned Additional Government Advocate to verify whether such award was passed in LAC No.28/2010. 4. Now, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent would submit that payment is made at the rate of Rs.7,000/- per square feet in respect of the very same notification. 5. 4. Now, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent would submit that payment is made at the rate of Rs.7,000/- per square feet in respect of the very same notification. 5. Having considered the grounds urged in the appeal as well as submission of learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent, when the property acquired is similar in nature as that of property acquired in LAC No.28/2010 which is situated at B.M. Road, Bangalore- Mangalore Road, Hassan and the same is acquired for the very same purpose under the same notification, there cannot be two yardstick for awarding compensation and when the respondent has already complied with the order passed in LAC No.28/2010 which was disposed of on 07.10.2014 and has also made payment, the appellant is also entitled for compensation as awarded in terms of LAC No.28/2010 in respect of this property also and this property is also a commercial building comprising of cellar and ground floor situated at B.M. Road, Hassan City and the area of land acquired is 252 square feet. When such being the material on record, the appellant is also entitled for compensation at the rate of Rs.7,000/- per square feet. 6. In view of the discussion made above, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The miscellaneous second appeal is allowed. (ii) The appellant is entitled for compensation of Rs.7,000/- per square feet in respect of the area of land acquired i.e., 252 square feet belonging to the petitioner along with all other statutory benefits, excluding the interest for the period of 575 days.