Judgment

SINGH, J.:- This appeal on certificate under Art. 133(1)(a) of the Constitution is directed against the Judgment and Order of the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack setting aside the order of the Subordinate Judge, Cuttack and reducing the amount of compensation awarded to the appellants.

2. The appellants are owners of plots in dispute which include Plots Nos. 177/16, 177/16-A, 177/17 and 177/17-A and situate in Village Jagbhairab having an area of about 12 acres. A notification under S. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued on 2-2-67 and in pursuance thereof the appellants land along with other land was acquired by the Government for the purpose of construction of Aviation Research Centre at Charbatiya. The Collector awarded compensation to the appellants at the rate of Rs. 2,000/- per acre. On a reference made at the instance of the appellants the Subordinate Judge, Cuttack awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 15,000/- per acre. On appeal by the respondents, the High Court modified the order of the Subordinate Judge and directed that the appellants be Paid compensation at the rate of Rs. 7,500/- per acre. Aggrieved, the appellants have preferred this appeal after obtaining certificate from the High Court.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants urged that the High Court was not justified in reducing the compensation awarded by the Subordinate Judge, as there was ample evidence on record to show that the market value of the land was much more than determined by the High Court and developmental activities had taken place near the land as a result of which the value of the land had appreciated tremendously. The learned counsel brought to our notice a number of judgments of the High Court where compensation for adjacent land acquired by the same Notification was determined at the rate of Rs. 15,000/- per Acre. In those cases Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondents before the High Court had conceded that the claimants were entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 15,000/- per Acre in the area in question. Learned Counsel further urged that the appellants land as well as the land of other claimants who have been awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 15,000/- per acre by the High Court are adjacent and there was no valid ground to award compensation to the appellants at a reduced rate.

4. We have been taken through the judgment under appeal and other judgments of the High Court and the evidence on record. After hearing counsel for the parties and having perused the records we find merit in the appellants submission. It is well settled that the owner of the acquired land is entitled to compensation on the basis of its market value. Section 23 of the Act lays down principles for determining compensation accordingly to which the owner is entitled to receive market value of the land. Market value means what a willing purchaser would pay to a willing seller for the property having regard to the advantages available to the land and the development activities which may be going on in the vicinity and the potentiality of the land. On the evidence on record it is apparent that the land in dispute is adjacent to the Industrial area of Charbatiya where a large number of factories including Orissa Textile Mills, Kalinga Tubes Ltd., a number of other factories are situate. The evidence on record further indicates that even though the land was being used for agricultural purposes but it was fit for non-agricultural purposes and it had potentiality for future use as factory or building site. The learned Subordinate Judge on perusal of the oral and documentary evidence on record determined the market value of the land at the rate of Rs. 15,000/- per Acre. The High Court held that since the State Government had been offering land situate in the adjacent Industrial Area to the industrialists at the rate of Rs. 7,500/- per acre, the appellants were entitled to compensation at that rate. In our opinion the High Court