The market value of the land as on the date of the publication of the notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is to be taken into consideration for determining compensation.

( 1 ) THIS judgment will dispose of regular First Appeals Nos. 27-D and 28-D of 1962. A Additional District Judge of Delhi, disposed of Land Acquisition case No. 74 of 1960 by his detailed order dated the 27th October, 1961, in terms whereof he also disposed of land acquisition case No. 73 of the same year. These two appeals are directed against the aforementioned two orders.

( 2 ) THE appellants in Regular First Appeal No. 27-D of 1962 are Patiala Flour Mills Company (Private) Limited, while Regular First Appeal No. 28-D of 1962 has been preferred TO by Messrs. Modi Sugar Mills. Limited. The appellants in the two appeals purchased land in Delhi through Rai Bahadur Gujara Mal Modi, who happened to be the Chairman of Modi Sugar Mills, Limited. The land was purchased for setting up a flour mill and a vanaspati factory. The flour mill was, according to the deposition of A. W. 10 Rai Bahadur Gujar Mal Modi, to be set up by Patiala Flour Mills Company, Limited, appellants in Regular First Appeal No. 27-D of 1962. The vanaspati factory was to be set up by Modi Sugar Industries. At the time of the purchases the land was claimed under a notification issued under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, hereinafter called "the Act ).

( 3 ) THE case set up by the appellants was that A. W. 10 was called by the Ministry of Food and asked to set up a Flour Mill at Delhi as the Ganesh Flour Mill had been gutted by fire. On information received from the Delhi Development Authority, Okhla, Industrial Area was considered as the proper site for purchasing the land. According to the deposition of A. W. 10 before the Additional District Judge, he met Shri A. D. Pandit, the then Chief Commissioner of Delhi, and told him that it was not possible to purchase a plot of land in the Okhia Industrial Area because the land in that area was going to be acquired. The concerned notification being No. F. 15 (141)/55-LSG (ii) had been issued on the 2nd of January, 1957, under section 4 of the Act for acquiring land measuring 177. 14 acres situated in village Bahapur for the public purpose of establishing an Industrial Estate. It may be noticed that the notification under section 6 of the Act in respect of the same land was issued on the 2nd of November, 1957. A. W. 10 stated in court that he had told the Chief Commissioner that it would not be possible for him to purchase the land until the notification issued under section 4 was withdrawn. He was directed to see Mr. Mathur, the then Secretary to the Chief Commissioner in the Department of Industries, who told A. W. 10 that no land could be de-notified at his instance unless he acquired an interest, in it. According to his deposition, he sew the Chief Commissioner again as also Mr. Mathur and it was after receiving assurance that the land to be purchased by him would be denotified that he made the actual purchases. In order to prove them A. W. 10 produced Exhibits 6 to A. 8, the certified copies of the sale deeds, staling that the originals had been lost. He could not produce any copy of any order allegedly dictated by Shri A. D. Pandit directing de-notification and took the stand that although at one time de-notification of the land, purchased by him, became imminent, the actual notification was never gazetted. The witness was unable to produce any writing to substantiate any of his assertions regarding the assurances allegedly given by the Chief Commissioner of Delhi or his Secretary in the Department of Industries. The Land Acquisition Collector acting under section II of the Act allowed compensation for the land at the rate of Rs. l,000. 00 per bigha. Out of the land for which compensation was to be paid at that rate, 23 bighas and II biswas had been purchased by Messrs Modi Sugar Mills Limited, while 33 bighas and 14 biswas had been purchased by Patiala Flour Mills Company (Private) Limited. A notice was issued to the appellants under section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act and on rece