R.F.A. No.137 of 2006 - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. R.F.A. No.137 of 2006 (O&M) Date of Decision:14.12.2010 Sapatar Singh ...... Appellant Versus State of Haryana and another ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Arvind Singh, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. D.D. Gupta, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal J. This order shall dispose of R.F.A. Nos.137 to 140, 213 to 215, 662 to 677, 807, 808, 1829, 3360, 3361, 4159 of 2006 and 2909 of 2008, as common question of law and facts are involved. The land owners are in appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation for the acquired land. Briefly the facts of the case are that vide notification issued under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short "the Act") dated 29.05.2002, State of Haryana acquired land measuring 23-24 (sic) acres in village Kakot, Distt. Kaithal for the construction of linkage of Pundari drain no.1 with Amin drain. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short “the Collector”) vide his award dated 14.02.2003 assessed the market value for acquired land as on measurement area was found to be 24.03 acres @ ` 1,60,000/- per acre. Vide same notification land of village Pilni was also acquired for the same purpose. The Collector vide its award dated 14.02.2003 assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 2,00,000/- per acre. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the land owners of both the villages filed objections under section 18 of the Act before the Collector, who referred the same to Addl. District Judge, Kaithal. Learned court below dismissed all the references of the land owners. Dissatisfied with the award of the learned court below the land owners preferred the present appeals. Learned counsel Mr. Arvind Singh, appearing on behalf of the R.F.A. No.137 of 2006 - 2 - land owners submitted that learned court below has wrongly dismissed the reference filed by the land owners as it has not taken into consideration sale instances produced by the land owners on record. He further submitted that the learned court below has also not taken into consideration the fact that the learned Collector has awarded ` 2,00,000/- per acre as compensation for the acquired land in village Pilni. The village Kakot is adjoining to village Pilni and the land of both the villages was acquired for the same purpose namely for construction of drain which is going further. The date of notification under section 4 and the date of award by the Collector are same. He prayed that the land owners of village Kakot are entitled atleast equal amount of compensation of their acquired land as of village Pilni. He further submitted that the learned court below has not awarded any compensation with regard to the severance of the land. On the other hand Mr. D.D. Gupta, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana has argued that learned court below has rightly dismissed the references of the land owners as the learned Collector has already awarded fair and adequate compensation to the land owners for their acquired land and the appellants are not entitled to any enhancement. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the relevant record. It is an admitted fact that vide notification dated 29.05.2002 issued under section 4 of the Act State of Haryana acquired land of villages Kakot and Pilni for the construction of linkage of Pundri drain no.1 with Amin drain. The land owners of village Kakot are entitled to at least the same amount of compensation as awarded to the land owners of village Pilni as both the villages are adjoining to each other. The land of both the villages was acquired for the same purpose and vide same notification. The sale instances produced by the land owners cannot be relied upon as these pertain to small plots and there is no site plan showing the location of these plots. Learned court below has not granted any compensation on account of severance. The land of the claimants was acquired for the construction of a drain which divides the land into two parts. It makes difficult to irrigate or to use divided portions of the remaining land to its optimum. It also makes difficult to irrigate the other side of the land. It is also difficult to cross over to the other side of the drain as generally there are no bridge over the canal and if provided are located at a distance. Considering the aforesaid facts, in my opinion, the compensation is R.F.A. No.137 of 2006 - 3 - required to be granted to the land owners for damages suffered on account of severance of land. Therefore, the land owners of both the villages are entitled 20% compensation on the market value of the acquired land on account of severance. Accordingly, the award with regard to village Pilni is upheld, whereas the land owners of village Kakot are held entitled to compensation @ ` 2,00,000/- per acre for their acquired land. The land owners of both the villages are also held entitled to additional 20% of the amount of the compensation of their acquired land on account of severance. The appellants are also held entitled all the statutory benefits available under the Act. The appeals are disposed of accordingly. (RAJESH BINDAL) 14.12.2010 JUDGE sarita