Sushil Kukreja, Judge.

1. Since both these appeals are the offshoots of award, dated 27.06.2008, passed by learned Additional District Judge-II, Kangra at Dharamshala (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Reference Court”), the same are taken up together and being disposed of by a common judgment.

2. The appellant/State of H.P. & another, who were respondents before the learned Reference Court, preferred the instant appeals under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short “the Act”) against award dated 27.06.2008, passed by learned Reference Court, whereby the petitioners, i.e., Dulo Ram and Budhi Singh, who were petitioners/claimants before the learned Reference Court (hereinafter referred to as “petitioners/claimants”) were granted enhanced compensation, with a prayer that the instant appeals be allowed and the impugned award be set-aside.

3. The facts giving rise to the instant appeals are that the land of petitioner-Dulo Ram, comprised in Khasra No. 958/381/1, measuring 0-02-11 hectares and that of petitioner Budhi Singh, comprised in Khasra No. 382, 383, 391, measuring 0-03-55 hectares, situated in Mohal Kandreth, Mauza Ichhi, Tehsil Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P., was acquired for construction of Mastpur-Icchi Road, vide notification dated 30.12.1995, issued under Section 4 of the Act, which was also published in daily news paper. Subsequently, notification under Sections 6 and 7 was issued on 15.05.1996, which was also duly published in daily newspaper. Consequently, possession of total land measuring 0-21-00 hectares was taken under Section 8 of the Act and it was acquired with description of Kulhi Awal measuring 0-13-69 hectares, Banjar Kadeem, measuring 0-00-88 hectares, khadeter measuring 0-02-42 hectares, Charagah Durkhtan, measuring 0-01-22 hectares and Gair Mumkin Rasta measuring 0-02-79 hectares. Thereafter, the Land Acquisition Collector, passed the award and granted compensation @Rs.1,17,039/- per hectare on the basis of market value alongwith other statutory benefits and total award of Rs.2,29,046/- was passed on 26.06.1998.

4. The petitioners/claimants, feeling aggrieved, filed reference petitions under Section 18 of the Act before the learned Reference Court for enhancement of the compensation amount and sought higher compensation at the rate of Rs.3,00,000/- per kanal, including enhancement of interest. The learned Reference Court, after considering all the material, passed the impugned award, dated 27.06.2008, whereby the petitioners/claimants were held entitled for enhanced compensation at the rate of Rs.19,23,076/- per hectare for the acquired land alongwith other statutory benefits. Hence, the instant appeals preferred by the appellants/State against the impugned award with a prayer that the appeals be allowed and the impugned award be set-aside.

5. The learned Deputy Advocate General for the appellants/State contended that the impugned award is wrong, illegal and against the material placed and proved on record and the learned Reference Court gravely erred in assessing the market value @ Rs.19,23,076/- per hectare. He further contended that impugned award is based on surmises, conjectures and hypotheses, thus the same is liable to be set-aside. He also contended that the learned Reference Court had grossly misread and mis-appreciated the oral as well as documentary evidence on record and cogent evidence was ignored. Lastly, he prayed that the impugned award be set-side by allowing the instant appeals.

6. Conversely, learned Counsel for proposed LRs No. 1(a) to 1(d) in RFA No. 381 of 2008, supported the impugned award and contended that the impugned award does not suffer from any legal infirmity and the same has been passed by the learned Reference Court after properly appreciating the facts and law. He prayed that the instant appeals, being without merits, be dismissed.

7. I have heard the learner Deputy Advocate General for the appellants/State, learned counse