1 RFA 65 of 1992 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH --- Regular First Appeal No. 65 of 1992 Date of Decision: 3.8.2009 State of Haryana through Collector, Kurukshetra and another --- Appellants Versus Boota Singh --- Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL --- PRESENT: Mr. Ashish Sharma, Deputy Advocate General Haryana for the appellants. None for the respondent. --- AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. This Regular First Appeal at the instance of the State of Haryana is directed against the award dated 31.8.1991 of the Reference Court, i.e. the Additional District Judge, Kurukshetra, on a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”) made by the claimant- respondent. The Reference Court held that the claimant-respondent was not entitled to enhancement of the amount of compensation than the one awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector. It was, however, further held that the claimant was entitled to the benefits of the provisions of Sections 23(1-A) and 28 of the Act, which had been brought about by the amending Act No. 68 of 1984. Adverting to the facts of the present case, it is manifest from the impugned award that land of the respondent-landowner was sought to be acquired by issuing notification under Section 4 of the Act, published in the relevant gazette dated 4.8.1978 and the same was acquired vide notification 2 RFA 65 of 1992 under Section 6 of the Act published in the gazette dated 27.2.1980. The Land Acquisition Collector, Panchkula gave his award dated 11.9.1980 determining the compensation of the acquired land. The precise submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants is that the Reference Court fell in error while extending the benefit of the provisions of Section 23(1-A) of the Act to the respondent-land owner. The counsel elaborating the above submission urged that the benefit of the aforesaid provision could be granted only in cases where the award was made by the Land Acquisition Collector after 30.4.1982, the date when the original Bill for the aforesaid amendment was introduced. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record. The matter is no longer res integra. This Court in Regular First Appeal No. 284 of 1990 (Sham Sarup and others vs. State of Haryana and others) decided on 29.7.2009 has held that where the Land Acquisition Collector had announced the award well before the bill was introduced, i.e. 30.4.1982, the benefit of the additional amount available under the provisions of Section 23(1-A) of the Act could not be extended to the landowner. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed and the impugned award of the Reference Court is modified to the extent that the respondent/landowner shall not be entitled to the additional amount of compensation granted under Section 23(1-A) of the Act, as awarded by the Reference Court, vide the award under appeal. There will be no orders as to costs. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) August 03, 2009 JUDGE *RKMALIK*