Punjab and Haryana High Court
CIVIL APPEAL 2994 of 1992 on 27 August 1974
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Cross -objection No. 49/CI of 1996 inR. F. A. No. 2994 of 1992.
Union of India and another ..... AppellantsvsChanan Singh .... Respondent Coram:Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. V. K. Kataria, Advocate, for the cross-objector/respondent.
Rajesh Bindal J.
The landowner has approached this court by filing the cross-objections for enhancement of compensation for the acquired land.
Briefly, the facts are that land measuring 6318 kanals 19 marlassituated in the revenue estate of Villages Machaki Kalan, Faridkot , Kila Nau andKameana was acquired vide notification dated 27.8.1974 issued under Section 4of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act') for establishing aCantonment. The same was followed by notification under Section 6 of the Acton 31.12.1974. Dissatisfied with the award of the Land Acquisition Collector(for short, `the Collector'), the land owners filed objections which were referred tothe learned court below for consideration, who keeping in view the material placedon record by the parties, vide award dated 29.2.1992 determined the value of theacquired land falling within 40 karams of Sadiq Faridkot road @ Rs. 30,000/- peracre and the remaining @ Rs. 20,000/- per acre.
Learned counsel for the objector/respondent submitted that the mainappeal was disposed of vide order dated 30.10.2008 in terms of judgment inR. F. A. No. 2506 of 1992Union of India and another vs Ram Singh (deceased)through LRs,however, inadvertently the cross-objections remained pending.Since this court had already disposed of the main appeal in terms ofjudgment inRam Singh'scase (supra), the cross-objections are also disposed of inthe same terms.
20.2.2009( Rajesh Bindal)vs.Judge