N.M. Jamdar, J.

1. These two Appeals arising from the Land Acquisition proceedings, challenge the Judgment and order passed by the Additional District Judge,Solapur in L.A.R.No.176 of 1996 dated 9th January, 2003. The First Appeal No.751 of 2003 is filed by the claimants challenging the judgment and the order on the ground that the compensation granted is inadequate, while the First Appeal No.1392 of 2004 is filed by the State of Maharashtra challenging the judgment and award on the ground that the compensation granted is excessive. Since the issues raised in both these appeals are connected, they are disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The property under acquisition i.e. C.T.S.No.617 1B admeasures 9469.33 sq.mts and is situated at Siddeshwar Peth, Solapur, within the limits of Solapur Municipal Corporation. The property was reserved for he purpose of Extension of Civil Hospital in the Development Plan of Solapur city, since the year 1978.

3. The said property was purchased by the claimants on 30.10.1988. As the property was reserved under the development plan, a notification under section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act read with section 126 (4) of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act 1966 dated 20.1.1994 was published on 17.2.1994. The land acquisition proceedings were duly completed and possession receipt of the acquired land was executed by the authorities on 16.10.1996.

4. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) Solapur initiated proceedings for determining the market value of the acquired property. Representatives of the SLAO and the City Survey officer inspected the area and found that there were residential buildings and commercial buildings around the acquired property, and a heavily trafficed road abutting it. The SLAO collected sale transactions of the lands which were situated within the radius of 5 kms around the acquired property for a period of five years prior to the material date i.e. 17.02.1994. The SLAO considered in all 18 sale instances for the period of five years before the material date. The SLAO however discarded majority of the sale instances since they were not comparable. The claimants sought compensation at the rate of Rs.4283.02 per sq.mtr. No evidence was however produced by the claimants. The SLAO also considered one particular sale instance which later on became subject of controversy was the sale deed between Yeshwant Cooperative Bank and Labour Federation dated 6.1.1994 (Exhibit 73) which fetched Rs.3228 per sq meter. The property therein admeasured 233.73 sq.meter. That sale was executed just prior to the material date. But the SLAO opined that the purchaser i.e.Labour Federation was very much in need of land and thus offered very high rate. He also found that the said sale transaction pertained to much smaller plot and it was not situated close to the acquired property. The SLAO thus did not rely on the said sale instance. The SLAO then proceeded to consider the sale instance of the acquired land itself executed on 30.10.1988. The claimants had purchased it for Rs.7 lacs at the rate of Rs.77.58 per sq.metre. The SLAO found the sale of the acquired property to be a reliable indicator for arriving at the market value of the acquired property on the material date. The SLAO considered the fact that the sale deed of the acquired land was effected five years back and he accordingly added 12% to offset the escalation of prices. The SLAO by his award dated 04.09.1996 granted compensation of Rs.12,32,300/- at the rate of Rs.472/-per sq.meter.

5. Being dissatisfied with the compensation granted, the Claimants approached the District Court at Solapur with land acquisition Reference No.174 of 1996 claiming compensation at the rate of Rs.5000/-per sq.meter and thus for an additional compensation of Rs.4,23,86,190/-. The State Government opposed the claim by filing their say. The claimants examined Shaikh Mainuddin Shaikh Chand, one of the Claimants on their behalf. The Claiman