CIVIL APPEAL 29 of 2006 on 12 May 1995

In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh

R. F. A. No. 29 of 2006 (O&M)

Coram:Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal

Present: Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Raman Gaur, Advocate, for HUDA.Rajesh Bindal J.

Through the present appeal the State has approached this court forreduction in compensation for the acquisition of land.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the State of Haryana videnotification dated 12.5.1995 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act,1894 (for short, “the Act”), acquired land forming part of Hadbast No. 38, inrevenue estate of Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar, for development and utilisation asresidential and commercial area in Sector-9 and 9-A, Bahadurgarh. The LandAcquisition Collector assessed the market value of the land at Rs. 6 lacs per acrefor the land situated on Bahadurgarh-Delhi road upto the depth of 3 acres, Rs. 4lacs per acre for the land situated on Bahadurgarh-Najafgarh road upto the depthof 3 acres, Rs. 2.50 lacs per acre for nehri and chahi and Rs. 2 lacs per acre forbarani and other kinds of land. The landowners/claimants feeling dissatisfied withthe quantum of compensation awarded by the Collector, filed objections. Onreference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below determined themarket value of the acquired land by granting increase of Rs. 50,000/- per acre ineach category. It is this award of the learned Reference Court which is impugnedin the present appeal.

Learned counsel for the State very fairly conceded that the issueinvolved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgment of this court inR. F. A. No. 1 of 2006State of Haryana and another vsJagbir Singh and others,decided on 10.2.2009, whereby the compensation payable to the landowners hasbeen further enhanced.

Since this court has further enhanced the compensation payable tothe landowners, the present appeal for reduction in compensation does not survive.Accordingly, for the reasons recorded inJagbir Singh'scase, the present appeal isdismissed.

13.2.2009vs.

( Rajesh Bindal)Judge