B. H. Marlapalle, J.

1. The award passed in L. A. R. No.

1159/1987, by the learned District Judge at Beed on 8th of July, 1988, has been challenged in this appeal filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the Act).

2. 2. We shall deal with the facts.

Agricultural land located in Survey No. 171 of Ambejogai, admeasuring 3 H. and 72 R. and owned by the appellant i.e. Zakir Ali s/o Parwarish Ali was acquired by the State Government under the Act for construction of S. T. Depot and Staff Quarters for the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, along with other patch of land admeasuring 49

R. from the said survey number thus, making a total of 4 H. and 21 R. under acquisition. The notification under Section 4 was issued on 12-8-1982, possession of the subject land was taken over on 13-8-1984, and, finally the Land Acquisition Officer passed his award on 23rd of September, 1986, and granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 900/- per R. for agricultural land and Rs. 4/- per sq. foot for the nonagricultural land. In addition, solatium at 30% as well as the interest component along with interest under Section 34 of the Act was granted and, thus, a total amount of Rs. 6,01,330.90 was paid to the respondent No. 1 in respect of the agricultural land admeasuring 3 H.72R.

1. 3. Being dissatisfied with the said amount of compensation, the claimant filed an application under Section 18 of the Act, for enhancement, which application was referred to the Court below and was registered as L.A.R. No. 1159/1987. The learned District Judge was pleased to fix the market value at the rate of Rs. 15/- per sq. foot and, by allowing one-third deduction for development charges, the amount of market value came to be fixed at Rs. 10/-per sq. foot for the entire land admeasuring 3 H. 72 R. (4,05,408 sq. foot) and by deducting the amount already paid to the claimants, additional amount of Rs. 48,31,164/- plus 12 per cent component was also directed to be paid under section 23(1A) of the Act from the date of publication of the notification under Section 4 i.e. 12-8-1982 to the date of possession i.e. 13th of August, 1984, The said additional amount came to Rs. 8,91,907/-. In addition, interest, as payable under Section 28, i.e. 9 per cent for the first year, from the date of possession, and, at the rate of 15 per cent thereafter, has also been directed to be paid. The entire amount has been deposited with the Bank of India by the M.S.R.T.C. as per the directions of this Court, while admitting the appeal.

4. While the reference was pending before the District Court, the M.S.R.T.C. moved an application at Exh. 10 for being impleaded as respondent No. 2 and the said application was allowed by order dt. 14-3-1988. The M.S.R.T.C. was allowed

to cross examine all the witnesses produced by the claimants as well as the Land Acquisition Officer and, it appears that, it examined Vasant Purohit (D. W. 2). Thus, the M.S.R.T.C., for whom the land was acquired, was given full opportunity to adduce the evidence and to take part in the reference proceedings. In the impugned award, the M.S.R.T.C. has been shown as respondent No. 2 and in this appeal filed by the State Government, the said Corporation is also shown as respondent No. 2, pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 6th of September, 1989, though it could have been in fact added as the second appellant.

2. 5. It has been contended before us, on behalf of the State and the acquiring body that, the compensation rate fixed by the Court below at Rs. 10 per sq. foot is not only exorbitant but, indeed, without considering the sale instances which were relied upon by the Land Acquisition Officer in his award dt. 23rd of September, 1986, as well as those additional sale instances which were brought before the Court below through the evidence of Vasant (D.W.2). The learned District Judge committed an error in relying upon the two sale instances from Survey No. 612 (Guruwar Peth