JUDGMENT :

M.A. CHOWDHARY, J.

1. Appellants, through the medium of this appeal, assail judgment dated 30.09.2015 (impugned judgment) passed by learned Principal District Judge, Rajouri (Reference Court) in Land Acquisition Reference No.11 titled “Abdul Hamid & Ors. Vs. Collector Land Acquisition & Anr.” to the extent of assessing compensation of their land @ Rs. 3.00 lacs per kanal. Additionally, they seek a direction to the respondents to grant compensation @ Rs. 10.00 lakh per Kanal as has been granted in one of the sale deed executed on 29.11.2006.

2. The facts in brief as narrated in the appeal are that:

Pursuant to an indent placed by respondent No.2-Director Colleges, Higher Education Department, J&K Government- vide communication No. HE/Plan-66/2005 dated 18.08.2005, for the purpose of construction of building for Government Degree College at Thanamandi, respondent No.1-Collector Land Acquisition, Rajouri, issued Notification dated 19.08.2005 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, calling objections from the interested persons relating to the acquisition of the land and in response to this notice, appellants submitted their objections. Thereafter, the respondents acquired the land of the appellants and determined the compensation @ 1.50 lakh per Kanal, which was received by the appellants under protest.

Being not satisfied with the compensation awarded to them, the appellants applied for making Reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, for enhancement of the compensation on the ground that the rate of the land in the vicinity adjoining to the land of the appellants is very high as the land in question falls under Municipal limits of Tehsil Thanamandi, as such, Reference was made to District Court Rajouri. On the basis of pleadings and after hearing both the sides, the reference was decided by the Reference Court by enhancing amount of compensation at the rate of Rs. 3.00 lakh per Kanal along with Jabrana @ 15% on the enhanced amount and with interest @ 6% per annum from the date on which the possession of the acquired land was taken by the respondents, till excess amount is made.

3. Appellants land owners, however, not even satisfied with the judgment dated 30.09.2015, passed by the Reference Court preferred the instant appeal, assailing the judgment on the grounds that the appellants had examined witnesses in the Court including revenue officers/officials, who had stated that the rate of the land in the vicinity where the land of the appellants is situated, is very high and not less than Rs. 10.00 lakhs; and had produced some registered sale deeds pertaining to year 2005 wherein in one of the sale deed, the rate of the land was shown as Rs. 4.00 lakhs per kanal before the award was passed on 27.12.2006; and whereas in another, the rate of such land had been shown as Rs. 6.00 lakh per kanal, however, the Reference Court had not considered the rates of the land in the vicinity of the acquired land.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that the Apex Court in various judgments, had observed that the market value of the land cannot be avoided and whatsoever is the rate in the vicinity of the adjoining land which has been acquired and which is evident from the sale deeds, the compensation is required to be given at the said rate as per the market value, however, the Collector as well as the Reference Court had rejected the claim of the appellants though substantial evidence was produced by the appellants, in support of their contention. He has further argued that the Apex Court in a case titled “Haridwar Development Authority vs. Raghubir Singh” reported as (2010) 11 SCC 581, had held that no deduction or cut should have been effected in the price disclosed by the sale deed for arriving at the market value and that the same view was taken by the Apex Court in other cases as well. He further argued that the market value of the land as per the sale deed executed by one Hussain Mohd. in favour of Saghir