JUDGMENT

SEN, J.:—The short question involved in this appeal by special leave and the further appeals u/s. 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Act for short) directed against the judgment and decrees of the Karnataka High Court dated January 24, 1979 and in the connected appeals is whether there has been any error in principle or in law in the method of valuation arrived at by the courts below in adopting fifteen to be the multiple for computation of capitalized value at certain agricultural lands acquired in the years 1971 and 1972. In the connected appeals although the point was not specifically taken before the High Court, but the parties were given notice that that was the real question to be determined. These appeals have accordingly been heard together as they involve common question. The issue involved is as to the proper multiplier to be applied in determining the capitalized value of the lands acquired and that depends on the rate of return on investments in 1971 and 1972.

2. In these appeals the Judgments were rendered by the High Court on appeals being preferred by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Davangere against the appellate judgments and decrees of the District Judge, Chitradurga and of the Civil Judge, Davangere on various references made under S. 18 of the Act.

3. The facts giving rise to these appeals are more or less similar, and the essential facts may be shortly stated. Due to the construction of D. B. Kere Pick-up Project, several thousand acres of agricultural land in two villages in the State of Karnataka Videlicet Budihar village in Harihar taluq and Siraganahally village in Davangere taluq got submerged and were accordingly acquired by the State Government pursuant to different notifications issued under Section 4 (1) of the Act published on diverse dates in the years 1971 and 1972 followed by the usual notifications under Section 6. In response to notices issued under Section 9 (2) of the Act, the respondents appeared before the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Davangere and claimed compensation varying between Rs. 15,000 per acre to Rs. 25,000 per acre for dry and wet lands depending upon the quality of the soil, the nature of the yield and the income derived therefrom. In some cases they also claimed compensation at more than rupees one lakh per acre for arecanut garden lands. The Special Land Acquisition Officer however by his various awards adopted a multiple of fifteen and awarded compensation at a flat rate of Rs. 3,300 per acre for dry agricultural lands and Rupees 5,000 per acre for wet agricultural lands. On reference under S. 18 of the Act in each of these cases, the Civil Judge, Davangere enhanced the amount of compensation to Rs. 19,500 per acre for wet agricultural lands and Rupees 1,10,000 for arecanut garden lands. There was common evidence adduced by the parties in all these cases and the evidence disclosed that the acquired lands were more or less similar in nature and contiguously situated. On a consideration of the evidence the learned Judge came to the conclusion that the lands affected were capable of yielding two crops in a year with assured irrigation facility, the first being of paddy and the second of jowar, groundnut, chillies etc. As there was no other method of determining the market value of the land, the learned Civil Judge applied a multiple of 15 times the net annual profits. On appeal by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, the High Court also adopted the capitalized value of 15 years purchase of the net annual profits but reduced the amount of compensation to Rs. 15,000 per acre for wet agricultural lands and Rs. 25,000 per acre for are canut garden lands i.e. depending upon the nature of the lands acquired. It would therefore appear that the High Court and the court below have both adopted fifteen to be the proper multiplier for computation of the capitalized value of the lands acquired for the purpose of determining the amount of compensation payable for ac