70] . That apart, I came to know that this sale instance is dt. 08.03.2004, which is a year old to the notification u/sec.4 of the Act, dt.12.04.2005. It was not expected on the part of LAO to consider such sale instance because it is in respect of land situated at village Sanja, whereas the acquired lands are situated at village Sarola. Details in this sale instance will show that it was in respect of a piece of dry land adm. OOH:06R only from village Sanja and was sold to Rs.51,000/-. The particulars in the sale instance will show that the dry land of a small area which is located adjacent to the land of purchaser, is purchased for digging of a well. That means the purchaser has paid extra/additional amount than to the true market price of the land considering the utility of the land already owned by the purchaser. Some deductions are to be made to this effect. Admittedly, there is no evidence by claimants leading to such deductions. Learned Advocate for claimants submitted that Rs.5,000/- be deducted as extra price and the remaining price be treated as the price of the land so sold. According to me, it will not be fair to accept the submission of learned Advocate. There is no hard and strict yardstick to this effect. Something to be done by keeping interest by both the sides. The contents of sale instance will show that there was a strong desire of purchaser for creation of irrigation facility for the land already held by him. He was bound to pay huge price for that facility. I, considering this aspect of the opinion to deduct at least 2/3rd of the amount against extra charges paid by the purchaser. This amount will come to Rs.32,670/-. By this was there remains balance of Rs.51,000 – 32670 = 18,330/-. That means the dry land so referred in the sale instance was sold to Rs.3,055/- per R.
