RFA No. 2110 of 1999 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh RFA No. 2110 of 1999 (O&M) Date of decision : 23.12.2011 Punjab State and others ... Appellants vs Sher Singh .... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, Advocate General, Punjab with Mr. Alok Jain, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. R. S. Manhas, Advocate, for the landowners. Rajesh Bindal J. This order shall dispose of appeals bearing RFA Nos. 2110 to 2115, 2772, 2773 of 1999, 348, 2420 of 2000 and 3534 of 2001 and Cross- objection No. 134/CI of 2011 in RFA No. 2111 of 1999, as common questions of law and facts are involved in these appeals. The State of Punjab has filed appeals seeking reduction of compensation awarded to the landowners for the acquired land whereas by filing appeals and the cross-objections, the landowners are seeking enhancement thereof. Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 19.11.1993, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), the State of Punjab sought to acquire land situated within the revenue estate of villages Jugial and Sadhuri, Tehsil Pathankot, District Gurdaspur, for construction of Barrage Canal. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 7.3.1994. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, 'the Collector') vide his award dated 16.10.1996, assessed the market value of the acquired land of village Jugial at the following rates:- Kinds of land Compensation per acre in ` Barani -I 32,000/- Barani-II 30,000/- Nehri 50,000/- Gair mumkin dariya 4,000/- RFA No. 2110 of 1999 (2) Whereas for the village Sadhuri, the Collector assessed the compensation @ ` 16,000/- to ` 20,000/- per kanal. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below determined the market value of the acquired land of village Jugial at the following rates:- Kinds of land Compensation per marla in ` Chahi 1,000/- Barani-I 800/- Other barani land 700/- Gair mumkin dariya/ salab etc. 200/- Whereas for village Sadhuri, the learned court below assessed the compensation @ ` 1,000/- per marla for all kinds of barani land and ` 200/- per marla for gair mumkin dariya land. Vide another notification dated 12.1.1990, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), the State of Punjab sought to acquire land situated within the revenue estate of village Jugial and Rajpura, Tehsil Pathankot, District Gurdaspur, for construction of Shahpur Kandi Barrage Project. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 28.2.1990. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, 'the Collector') vide his award dated 29.5.1991, assessed the market value of the acquired land at the following rates:- For village Rajpura Kinds of land Compensation per acre in ` Nehri/ Chahi 36,000/- Barani-I 30,000/- Barani -II 24,000/- Gair mumkin rasta 24,000/- For village Jugial Kinds of land Compensation per acre in ` Barani-II 24,000/- Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below determined the market value of the acquired land at the following rates:- RFA No. 2110 of 1999 (3) For village Rajpura Kinds of land Compensation per acre in ` Nehri/ Chahi 45,000/- Barani-I 38,000/- Barani -II 29,000/- Gair mumkin /rasta 29,000/- For village Jugial Kinds of land Compensation per acre in ` Barani-II 29,000/- The aforesaid awards are impugned by both the parties before this court. Learned counsel for the landowners submitted that the claim of the parties in present set of appeals and cross-objections is squarely covered by judgment of this court in RFA No. 4525 of 2001- Thuru Ram vs State of Punjab and others, decided on 16.3.2009, whereby the amount of compensation pertaining to the land acquired in the year 1990 was assessed @ ` 1,290/- per marla and ` 1,754/- per marla for the land acquired in the year 1993. Learned Advocate General, Punjab, did not dispute the aforesaid factual position. Since this court had enhanced the compensation payable to the landowners for the acquired land, the claim of the State of Punjab does not survive. Accordingly, the appeals filed by the State of Punjab are dismissed and the appeals and the cross-objections filed by the landowner are disposed of in terms of judgment in Thuru Ram's case (supra). 23.12.2011 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge