IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM No.10213-CI of 2006 and RFA NO.3240 of 2003 DATE OF DECISION: January 9, 2007 Hansraj and others ….Appellants. VERSUS Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation and others …. Respondents CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL PRESENT: Shri R.K.Jain, Advocate for the appellants. Viney Mittal,J.(Oral). The learned counsel for the applicant-appellants states that the main appeal is covered by the judgment dated May 19,2006 passed in RFA No.2699 of 2003 and as such be disposed of in the same terms. Notice of the application to the Advocate General, Haryana. On the asking of Court, Shri Ashok Jindal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. I have gone through the judgment dated May 19, 2006 passed in RFA No.2699 of 2003 (Pran Sukh and others v. State of Haryana and others) and find that the controversy in the aforesaid appeal was with regard to assessment of the acquired land qua which CM No.10213-CI of 2006 and RFA NO.3240 of 2003 -2- the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 had been issued on November 15, 1994. In the present appeal also, the land in question was acquired and a notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on November 15, 1994 i.e. the same notification which was issued qua the acquired land in Pran Sukh’s case (supra). In view of the aforesaid fact, the prayer made in the application is allowed. The main appeal is disposed of in terms of the judgment dated May 19, 2006 in RFA No.2699 of 2003 (Pran Sukh and others v. State of Haryana and others). CM as well as main appeal stand disposed of accordingly. January 9, 2007 (Viney Mittal) KD Judge