IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA FA No.447 of 1996 STATE OF BIHAR . Versus BASUDEO SAH . with FA No.460 of 1996 STATE OF BIHAR . Versus PANCH MANI SAH . with FA No.473 of 1996 STATE OF BIHAR . Versus JAGDISH LAL DAS & ANR . with FA No.453 of 1996 STATE OF BIHAR . Versus LAXMI LAL SAHA . with FA No.455 of 1996 STATE OF BIHAR . Versus SUBAYLAL SAHA . with FA No.458 of 1996 STATE OF BIHAR . Versus FULESHWAR SINGH . ----------- PRESENT: THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE J U D G E M E N T (16.04.2010) Dipak Misra, C.J.- In this batch of appeals, preferred under Section 2 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, the assail is to the award dated 29th March, 1996 passed in a batch of cases by the learned Subordinate Judge-cum-Land Acquisition Special Judge, Saharsa. It is not in dispute that the land was acquired in 1982 by virtue of notification issued in the year 1989. Before the Land Acquisition Collector claim was put forth by all the claimants that the price of the lands should be determined on the ground that three crops were yielded and that there was a tendency in the area to sale the land at a lower price to save the stamp duty. It was urged that the appropriate price would be Rs.82,000/- per acre. The Land Acquisition Collector awarded Rs.22,900/- per acre for Dhanahar Class-II lands and Rs.30,835/- for Dhanahar Class-I lands. Before the reference Court no documentary evidence was adverted and things were based on oral evidence. The Reference Court analyzing the totality of circumstances has expressed an opinion that 20 years calculation has to be taken into consideration and, therefore, Rs.80,000/- per acre should be granted but 3 considering the crops raised and the cost impact he has reduced it to Rs.60,000/- per acre. While determining the price fixation, many an aspects are to be taken in view. There can be no doubt, the computation on the basis of the yield is an acceptable method, yet, it has to be viewed from a prudent man’s perspective and certain guess work is permissible. If oral evidence is taken into consideration, three aspects become clear, they are, the land is fertile and were yielding three crops per year, the land was near homestead land and there is variation with regard to the price of the yield as deposed by the witnesses. Regard being had to the same, I am disposed to think that Rs.3,000/- per acre determined as the yield of the year, Rs.500/- has to be reduced towards the cost as some amount is spent on growing the paddy then Rs.2,500/- should be the cost for paddy yield price. The multiplier of 20 gets attracted. Thus, the price of the land is determined at Rs.2,500 x 20=50,000/-. The claimant shall be entitled to all the statutory benefits including the interest on solatium as per the decision rendered in Sunder v. Union of India, AIR 2001 SC 4 3516. In the result, the appeals are allowed in part and the award passed by the Reference Court is modified accordingly. Parties shall bear their respective costs throughout. Dilip ( Dipak Misra, C.J. )