( 1 ) HEARD the learned Advocate on both sides. This being an old case where in the appellants are only asking for an enhancement in the compensation. I had directed notice to the learned government advocate. The learned government Advocate points out that the lower court records are not yet received and that there are certain records on which he desires to rely on. For instance, he points out that the copies which have been furnished to him and which have been scrutinized pertain to the previous years and not to the year during which the acquisition took place. He further submits that for purposes of following the capitalization method it will be very necessary that the court scrutinizes, on the basis of the figures in the impugned Order, as to whether any interference is called for. It is his submission that the court is required to average the yield and thereafter multiply the same and that the learned trial judge has been not only cautious but absolutely correct while following this procedure.

( 2 ) LEARNED Advocate for appellants submits that there is nodispute with regard to the lower court records and that there is no need to defer the disposal of the appea