( 1 ) THIS judgment is meant to dispose of these group of appeals filed under Section 54 of the land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") since they arise out of same award of the Collector Land Acquisition.

( 2 ) A big chunk of land situate within Revenue estate of village Tughlakabad was notified for being acquired, at public expense for public purpose, namely Planned Development of Delhi through notification issued under Sections 4 and 17 (1) of the Act on 1. 6. 1992. It was followed by declaration under Section 6 of the Act made on 29. 7. 1992. As Section 17 (1) of the Act was invoked, compliance of Section 5a of the Act was waived off. Actual physical possession of the land admittedly had already been taken over on 4. 7. 1988.

( 3 ) PURSUANT to notices issued under Sections 9 and 10 (1) of the Act claims were invited. The collector Land Acquisition on 17. 5. 1994 made his award No. 4/94-95 offering amount of compensation to the claimants at the rate of Rs. 118. 00 per sq. yard as against the claim of Rs. 5,000. 00 per sq. yard. Feeling dissatisfied references were sought by the claimants. The Reference Court through the impugned awards determined the amount of compensation holding the claimants to be entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 223. 00 per sq. yard. Still feeling dissatisfied further enhancement has been sought by the claimants in these appeals. Though the claims initially were up to Rs. 5,000. 00 per sq. yard but in the appeals the claims have been restricted their claim up to rs. 3,000. 00 per sq. yard because of paucity of finance to pay for the requisite amount of court fee.

( 4 ) THE question before us in these appeals is about the amount of compensation payable to the claimants for acquisition of their property taking into consideration the potentiality of the land as on the date of notification under Section 4 of the act.

( 5 ) THE mandate of law is that a person , who is deprived compulsorily of his land for public purpose by the State, under the provisions of the land Acquisition Act, must be paid compensation in accordance with law i. e. the true market value. This Constitutional mandate of paying the true market value of land was highlighted by the supreme Court in its decision in Bhag Singh and others v. Union Territory of Chandigarh AIR 1985 s. C. 1576 saying:-

"where land is acquired under the Land acquisition Act, 1894, it would not be fair and just to deprive the holder of his land without payment of the true market value when the law in so many terms, declares that he shall be paid such market value. "

( 6 ) IN determining the amount of compensationy factors enumerated in Section 23 of the Act are to be taken into consideration and the factors enumerated in Section 24 of the Act are to be excluded. It need hardly be said. that the land is not to be valued merely by reference to the use to which it is being put at the time at which its value has to be determined,, but only by reference to the uses, which it is reasonably; capable of being put in future. This potential use to which the land is reasonably capable of being put in future in the hands of the owner has to be taken into consideration and the owner is entitled to have the price assessed with reference to the advantages which will give the land the greatest value. The value of an owner s interest is not properly compensated by assessing the amount of pecuniary benefits obtained by past user in disregard of the possible benefits in future. The possibility of a mere profitable use is one such advantage, which may be taken into consideration, which is known as the potential value.

( 7 ) THE Supreme Court in The Collector, Raigarh. Dr. Harisingh Thakur and another. (1979) 1 s. G. C. 236 held that the question as -to whether a particular land had potential value as a building site or not is primarily one of fact depending upon several factors such as its condition and situation, the user to which it i