As per case facts, a significant land area was acquired for industrial use. While most landowners accepted an agreed-upon compensation, a minority sought higher compensation. The Land Acquisition Officer, considering ... the settled agreements, awarded a certain compensation. However, the Civil Court drastically increased this amount based on a sale deed for a very small parcel and an expert's report, which the High Court subsequently reduced. The state appealed against this enhanced compensation. The question arose whether courts could entirely ignore an earlier compensation agreement for a large, similar land area and base new compensation solely on a small land sale and a derivative expert report. Finally, the Supreme Court ruled that the Civil Court was wrong to disregard the prior settlement. It stated that compensation for large areas should not be determined by sales of small plots or expert reports based on such limited data. The burden is on claimants to prove the original award was insufficient, which was not met here. The Court affirmed the initial award.