law: Land Acquisition Act, 1894
  23.Matters to be
  
  considered in determining compensation:-
  (1) In determining the
  
  amount of compensation to be awarded for land acquired under this Act, the
  
  court shall take into consideration-
  first,
  
  the market-value of the land at the date of the publication of the {Subs, by
  
  Act 38 of 1923, s.7, for "declaration relating thereto under s.6."}
  
  [notification under section 4, sub-section (1)];
  secondly,
  
  the damage by the person interested, by reason of the taking of any standing
  
  crops or trees which may be on the land at the time of the Collector's taking
  
  possession thereof;
  thirdly,
  
  the damage (if any) sustained by the person interested, at the time of the
  
  Collector's taking possession taking possession of the land, by the reason of
  
  severing such land from his other land;
  fourthly,
  
  the damage (if any) sustained by the person interested, at the time of the
  
  Collector's taking possession of the land, by reason of the acquisition
  
  injuriously affecting his other property, movable or immovable, in any other
  
  manner, or his earnings;
  fifthly,
  
  if in the consequence of the acquisition of the land by the Collector, the
  
  person interested is compelled to change his residence or place of business,
  
  the reasonable expenses (if any) incidental to such change; and
  sixthly,
  
  the damage (if any) bona fide resulting from diminution of the profits of the
  
  land between the time of the publication of the declaration under section 6 and
  
  the time of the Collector's taking possession of the land.
  (2) In addition to the
  
  market-value of the land as above provided the Court shall in every case award
  
  a sum of fifteen per centum on such market-value, in consideration of the
  
  compulsory nature of the acquisition.  
  Comment: "It is settled law that the burden of proof of market value
  
  prevailing as on the date of publication of Section 4(1) notification is always
  
  on the claimants. Though this Court has time and again pointed out the apathy
  
  and blatant lapse on the part of the acquiring officer to adduce evidence and
  
  also improper or ineffective or lack of interest on the part of the counsel for
  
  the State to cross-examine the witnesses on material facts, it is the duty of
  
  the Court to carefully scrutinise the evidence and determine just and adequate
  
  compensation. If the sale deeds are fond to be genuine, the market value
  
  mentioned therein must be presumed to be correct. If the genuineness is
  
  doubted, it cannot be relied upon, Proper tests and principles laid down by
  
  this Court must be applied to determine compensation." Hookiyar Singh
  
  v. Special Land Acquisition Officer, Moradabad AIR 1996 SUPREME
  COURT 3207