ORDER

1. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the Act) was published in the State Gazette on 13-3-1974 acquiring a total extent of 881 acres of land for planned development of the municipality. The Land Acquisition Collector in his award dated 31-3-1976 determined the compensation to the plain lands at Rs 39,400 per acre and to the land abutting up to a depth of 100 karams (5-1/2 feet each karam) from the Ludhiana-Chandigarh main road @ Rs 42,400 per acre and for the other lands different rates were given with which we are not presently concerned. On reference under Section 18, the Additional District Judge by his award and decree dated 18-10-1978 fixed the market value of the land abutting the Ludhiana-Chandigarh road up to a depth of 100 karams at Rs 72,600 per acre and for the remaining land @ Rs 58,080 per acre. The State filed no appeals. On appeal by the claimants for further enhancement, the learned Single Judge by his judgment and decree dated 20-8-1980 determined the market value up to a depth of 100 karams abutting Ludhiana-Chandigarh Road at Rs 89,000 and for the remaining land at Rs 39,000 per acre. On LPA, the Division Bench by its judgment and decree dated 23-12-1981 while maintaining the award of the compensation for the land up to the depth of 100 karams abutting the Ludhiana-Chandigarh main road has enhanced the market value for the rest of the lands from 100-200 karams at Rs 58,080 and for the remaining lands @ Rs 50,000 and Rs 48,400 per acre. Still dissatisfied therewith, the appellants have filed the appeals for further increase in the compensation.

2. Firstly, it was contended that the Division Bench having determined the compensation was not justified in deducting l/3rd towards developmental charges as the sales therein though were on yardage basis and determined the compensation on acreage basis @ Rs 58,000, Rs 50,000 and Rs 48,000 etc. Though we find force in the contention, the matter does not rest with that conclusion. It is seen that the High Court in its judgment has relied upon the sale transactions small extents of 150 to 250 sq. yards which was worked out on an average of Rs 1,37,600. They were sold on yardage basis. The learned Judges have determined market value on acreage basis and deducted l/3rd towards development charges and determined the market value on that basis. The question emerges, ultimately, whether the fixation of the market value @ Rs 50,000 and Rs 48,000 is unwarranted on the facts and circumstances of these cases. It is seen that a land of magnitude of 881 acres when was acquired for planned development of the town, a willing purchaser would offer the same rates at which small plots admeasuring to 120 to 250 sq. ft. were offered and sold. It is impossible to accept that the lands would fetch that price when a large track of land was offered for sale in open market to willing buyer. Under those circumstances, sale transactions are absolutely and totally irrelevant and cannot form the basis to determine the compensation. Even though the vendor or vendees were examined to prove the sale transaction, we cannot determine market value on that basis and award compensation. The court has power and duty to evaluate the evidence in proper perspective, apply correct principles and award compensation. Since the State did not file any appeals, we cannot interfere with the award of the market value determined @ Rs 50,000 and Rs 48,400 by the Division Bench for the lands in appeals.

3. It is next contended that for lands in Jamalpur, compensation was awarded at the rate of Rs 50,000. The lands in Kuliawal were equally situated and compensation paid at the rate of Rs 39,000 per acre is unjust and arbitrary. We find no force in the contention. Though some plans have been produced before us to show that both the lands are on the side of Tajpur Road, they were not filed in the reference court nor subjected them for cross-examination of the LAC of the respecti