facts of the present case, it is evident that the land in Ex. P5 is similar in nature to the acquired land, both being agricultural land. Its proximity to the acquired land and the fact that it is situated in the same village of Tauru, are relevant 14 Balwan Singh v. State of Haryana and others, 2022 SCC Online SC 637; Chandrashekar v. LAO, (2012) 1 SCC 390. 15 Subh Ram v. State of Haryana, (2010) 1 SCC 444. 16 Ibid. 26 | Pagewhen determining the extent of deductions to be applied in calculating the compensation to be granted to the Appellants. Additionally, what is also of utmost importance is that the value of the land is corroborated by surrounding circumstances, which point towards its potentiality. Although Ex. P76 cannot be relied upon since it was executed after the Section 4 notification, it nonetheless reflects the land’s potential for being used other than for agricultural purposes. Moreover, the acquired land’s strategic location near the Bus Stand, Grain Market and Main