( 1 ) THIS is an appeal under section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the Act ) against judgment dated 16 July, 1977 of Mr. C. D. Vashishta, Additional District Judge, Delhi, whereby on reference made to him under section 18 of the Act, he declined to interfere in the award given by the Land Acquisition Collector. In his award No, 1745 of 20 November 1964 the Land Acquisition Collector had fixed the market value of the appellant s land at Rs. 4,oo0. 00 per bigha. The village in which the land of the appellant was situated was Khampur Raya and notification under section 4 of the Act respecting the appellant s land and some other land in all measuring 237 bighas 9 biswas was issued on 26 July 1976. Then notification under section 6 was issued on 27 March 1958. The land of the appellant measured 33 bighas 5 biswas.

( 2 ) IN this appeal the appellant has claimed that the compensation be enhanced to Rs. 21. 00 per sq. yd. besides solatium and interest. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant filed an application for early hearing of the same on the ground that this court in R. F. A. 237/73 (Harbans Singh and others v. Union of India) decided on 10 April 1980 had already fixed the market value of the land in the revenue estate of village Khampur Raya at Rs. 6,500. 00 per bigha. thereby enhancing the market value by Rs. 2,500 per bigha. The appeal RFA 237/73 also arose of the same award as in the present appeal. This appeal was, therefore, listed for early hearing. At the time of hearing, however, the appellant submitted that the enhanced amount of compensation be not limited to what was awarded in the appeal filed by Harbans Singh (R. F. A. 237/73) and that the appellant is entitled to compensation at the much higher rate. In support of this submission Mr Dhamiji who appeared for the appellant referred to two decisions of this Court, one in R. F. A. 10/73-Smt. Shantl Devi. Union of India, and the other in R. F. A. 19/68-Union of India v. Nathu Pershad. Both the appeals were decided by order dated 14 April 1988 by a Single Judge of this Court. In Shanti Devi s appeal with which two other appeals were connected, this Court fixed the market value of the land of the village Khampur Raya at the rate of Rs. 18. 00 per sq. yd which was situated on the main Patel Road, and the land which was not situated on the road Rs. 17. 00 per sq. yd. For the land which was having deep pits the court fixed the market value at Rs. 15. 00 per sq yd. In the other appeal-Union of India v. Nathu Pershad the Additional District Judge has fixed the market value of the land in this very village situated on the main Patel Road at Rs. 27,600. 00 for 1 bjgha 5 biswas. This was confirmed and the appeal by Union of India was dismissed. In both these judgments the notification under section 4 of the Act was issued on 13 November 1959 and not on 26 July 1956 as in the present case before us. In Union of India v. Nathu Pershad it was only a small plot of land measuring bigha 5 biswas and had been purchased by the owner for a sum of Rs. 27,600. 00 by sale deed dated March 1957. The Court accepted the genuineness of this sale deed and awarded the compensation for the same amount. The land, as noted above, was situated on the main Patel Road. In Shanti Devi s case the court observed referring to some earlier appeals that sale deed in case of Pritam Singh s case was sufficient guide for the prevailing market price at the time of the notification under section 4 of the Act. Pritam Singh had purchased a plot of land in this very village on 15 December 1956 measuring 514 sq. yds. for a sum of Rs. 10,000. 00. A Beach of this Court held in appeal (Union of India v. Pritam Singh RFF\ 76-D/6l, decided on 6 January 1970) that sale deed of Pritam Singh represented a true and normal transaction and was proximate in time. In that case the date of notification under section 4 of the Act was 24 April 1957. But then land of Pritam Singh was als