4 . It is seen that enhanced compensation has been granted to the claimants by the reference court based on Ext.A1 judgment in L.A.R.No.222 of 1998. The reference court observed that the said case is also one relating to a land acquired for the same purpose pursuant to the same notification for which the Land Acquisition Officer fixed the land value at Rs.3,414/- per Are. The argument advanced by the learned Government Pleader is that L.A.R No.222 of 1998 relates to a land situated in a different village and as such, the reference court ought not have placed reliance on the decision in the said case for granting enhanced compensation to the claimants. I do not agree. Even though the property covered by L.A.R.No.222 of 1998 is one situated in a different village, it was acquired for the same purpose pursuant to the same notification and the Land Acquisition Officer has fixed the same land value at Rs.3,414/- per Are as in the instant case. In the circumstances, according to me, the reference court cannot be found fault with for having decided the reference based on the judgment in the said case. The land acquisition appeal, in the circumstances, is without merits and the same is, accordingly,
