Coming to the determination of the compensation of the acquired lands, it is seen from the records that the lands were classified as dry lands without irrigation facility and dry lands irrigated with the water of private wells. As per Ex.A.1 the Land Acquisition Officer, had considered as many as 173 sale transactions prevailing in the village for these two categories of land while fixing the above market value, but the same were not filed by him during the course of enquiry. No oral evidence was adduced by the referring officer. The claimants, in support of their claim, relied on Exs.B.1 and B.2 apart from the oral evidence of RWs. 1 and 2. According to Ex.B.1 sale deed the value of the dry land works out to Rs.75,000/- per acre. Though the sale covered by Ex.B.1 is not in the immediate vicinity of the acquired land, the Land Acquisition Officer clearly observed in Ex.A.1 that the land in Ex.B.1 is situated very nearer to mining industry. The trial Court taken into consideration Ex.B.1 while assessing the market value ( near and around the acquired land), and enhanced the market value ( of the land ) to Rs.45,000/- for the dry lands without irrigation i.e. category no.1 and to Rs.70,000/- per acre for the dry lands with irrigation potentiality by private wells i.e. category no.2. The trial Court, on adjudication of the matter, came to the just conclusion, basing on the evidence adduced by the claimants, that the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer is on lower side and inconsistent with the existing market value and therefore enhanced the market value of the lands as stated
