8. It is to be seen that during the pendency of Award proceedings before the Land Acquisition Officer, an amount of Rs.1,01,970/representing 80% of the compensation payable to the appellant/claimant was paid. However, final Award was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer on 26.5.1990 fixing market value for the subject land at Rs.56,970/- per acre. Before the reference Court, though the appellant/claimant has claimed higher compensation, he has not chosen to file any document, except Exs.A.1 and A.2, which are post dated transactions to the Notification issued on 26.5.1988 for acquisition of the subject land. In that view of the matter, the reference Court has rightly discarded the said documents while fixing market value for the subject land. Even a copy of the order in O.P.No.52 of 1984, whereunder the compensation for the lands thereunder was said to be granted at Rs.60/- per square yard, was not marked before the reference Court in support of his claim for higher compensation. Merely by referring order in O.P.No.52 of 1984 without marking a copy of the same as an exhibit, the appellant/claimant is not entitled for enhancement of compensation. Further, fixation of market value of the land depends upon so many factors, like location of the land, nearness to the Highways, etc., and in the absence of any map or sketch filed on behalf of the appellant/claimant showing the proximity of the acquired land to the land covered by the order in O.P.No.52 of 1984, the appellant/claimant is not entitled for higher market value basing on such order. In the absence of any other evidence available on record, merely because the preliminary value of the subject land was fixed at Rs.1,01,970/- per acre, that by itself is not a ground for seeking enhancement of compensation while passing final award. It is always open for the Land Acquisition Officer to enquire and collect the data for a period of three years preceding the date of Notification and come to a conclusion with regard to the value of the subject land. In view of the reasoning assigned by the reference Court, we are of the view that the market value fixed by the reference Court for the subject
