RFA No.1263 of 2004 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. R.F.A.No.1263 of 2004 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Makhan Singh .....Appellant vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.2150 of 1986 Iqbal Singh .....Appellant vs. State of Punjab .....Respondent RFA No.381 of 1991 Sham Lal and others .....Appellants vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.382 of 1991 Swaran Singh and another .....Appellants vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.383 of 1991 Ajit Singh and others .....Appellants vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.384 of 1991 Chet Ram .....Appellant vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.385 of 1991 Smt.Parwati .....Appellant vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.1263 of 2004 2 RFA No.386 of 1991 Anant Ram .....Appellant vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.387 of 1991 Gurbax Singh deceased now represented through legal representatives. .....Appellants vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.388 of 1991 Parkash Singh .....Appellant vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.389 of 1991 Kashmiri Lal .....Appellant vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.390 of 1991 Daya Ram and others .....Appellants vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.391 of 1991 Swaran Singh .....Appellant vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.392 of 1991 Parkash .....Appellant vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.393 of 1991 Mohinder Singh .....Appellant vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.1263 of 2004 3 RFA No.394 of 1991 Amar Singh deceased now represented though his legal representatives and another .....Appellants vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.395 of 1991 Durga Ram .....Appellant vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.396 of 1991 Rakha legal representative of deceased Lichu aliasLachhman Dass .....Appellants vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.397 of 1991 Gurbax Singh and others .....Appellant vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.398 of 1991 Sant Ram .....Appellant vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.399 of 1991 Surjit Kaur .....Appellant vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.648 of 1992 Lachhmi Devi L.R of Shiv Ram deceased .....Appellant vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.1263 of 2004 4 RFA No.649 of 1992 Roshan legal representative of Norang deceased .....Appellant vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.650 of 1992 Sham Lal and another .....Appellants vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.651 of 1992 Roshan LaL .....Appellant vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.652 of 1992 Roshan legal representative of deceased Norang .....Appellant vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.884 of 1992 Daya Ram deceased now represented by Daulat Ram L.R and others .....Appellants vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.1039 of 1992 Daya Ram deceased now represented by Daulat Ram L.R and others .....Appellants vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents RFA No.1263 of 2004 5 RFA No.2070 of 1991 State of Punjab .....Appellant vs. Sada Ram .....Respondent RFA No.2071 of 1991 State of Punjab .....Appellant vs. Sada Ram .....Respondent RFA No.2072 of 1991 State of Punjab .....Appellant vs. Rada Ram .....Respondent RFA No.2073 of 1991 State of Punjab .....Appellant vs. Amrinder Singh .....Respondents RFA No.3106 of 2008 Hardarshan Singh Virk and others .....Appellants vs. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. -- Present: Mr.Mr.Arun Jain,Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain,Advocate, and Mr.Pritam Saini, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr.R.N.Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. Rakesh Kumar Garg. (Oral) This judgment shall dispose of 33 Regular First Appeals i.e. R.F.A.No. 2150 of 1986, 381 to 399, 2070 to ,2073 of 1991, 648 to 652,884 and 1039 of 1992, 1263 of 2004 and 3106 of 2008, which have arisen out of the acquisition proceedings initiated vide notification dated 30.11.1982 RFA No.1263 of 2004 6 issued under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ( for short “the Act”). Vide notification issued under section 4 of the Act dated 30.11.1982 published on 1.12.1982 followed by a notification issued under section 6 of the Act dated 6.12.1982 published on 7.12.1982, total land measuring 52.84 acres of village Dugri,Tehsil and District Ropar was acquired for the construction of Sutlej-Yamuna Link Canal. Out of the acquired land, 363 kanals of land was Chahi, 23 kanals 5 marlas of land was Barani and 36 kanals 9 marlas of land was Gair Mumkin. The Land Acquisition Collector awarded amount of compensation of Rs. 32,200/- per acre for Chahi, Rs.24190/- per acre for Barani and Rs.5,500/- per acre for Gairmumkin.The Reference Court vide its award dated 2.9.1985,maintained the amount of compensation as determined by the Collector. RFA Nos.2150 of 1986, 381 to 399, 648 to 652, 884 and 1039 of 1992 and 3106 of 2008, have been filed by the claimants challenging the aforesaid award of the Reference Court dated 2.9.1985, on the ground of inadequate compensation, whereas RFA Nos.2070,2071,2072 and 2073 of 1991, have been filed on behalf of the State of Punjab, for reduction of compensation as awarded by the Reference Court vide aforesaid award. It is relevant to mention at this stage that one of the claimants namely Iqbal Singh (claimant in Land Reference No.130 of 1984 mentioned at Serial No.13 in the cases decided by the Reference Court on 2.9.1985), filed RFA No.2013 of 1994, which was disposed of by this Court on 14.2.2003 remanding the matter to the Reference Court, directing the Court to allow the parties an opportunity to produce evidence. After RFA No.1263 of 2004 7 remand the claimants summoned the witnesses and also tendered into evidence copies of the judgments and other documents. In rebuttal respondents also examined Malkiat Singh RW1 and tendered into evidence copies of the sale deeds Ex.R2 to R5 according to which average rate of the land in dispute comes to Rs.28000/- per acre. The District Judge/reference Court vide its judgment dated 4.2.2004 held that the claimants were entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs.2,05,000/- per acre for chahi land and Rs. 1,16,000/- per acre for barani land with further relief of all statutory benefits. The instant appeal (RFA No.1263 of 2004) has been filed against the aforesaid award dated 4.2.2004 by the claimants for further enhancement of compensation. The land in dispute pertains to village Dugri. While passing the award dated 4.2.2004, a finding has been recorded that vill;age Thalli is on one side of the S.Y.L.Canal and village Dugri and Ahmedpur are on the other side. Village Dugri is closer to village Thalli as compared to Ahmedpur, Ahmedpur is definitely at more distance than Dugri from village Thalli. It has also come on record that the quality of land of village Thalli and Ahmedpur,Nanakpura and Dargah Shah is of the same quality. It is also not in dispute that land of the aforesaid villages has been acquired for the same public purpose i.e. for construction of SYL Canal though the notifications acquiring land of these villages were issued separately. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State could also not dispute the fact that land of village Nanakpura was also acquired for construction of SYL_Canal for which award Ex.A11, which was produced on record of Reference Court was passed. It is also not in dispute that RFA RFA No.1263 of 2004 8 No.102 of 1991(Darshan Singh v. State of Punjab) challenging the aforesaid award of village Nanakpura has been decided by this Court vide judgment dated 29.5.2008 whereby compensation of the acquired land has been assessed at Rs.4,84,000/- per acre for the acquired land of village Nanakpura acquired vide notification dated 19.9.1985 issued under section 4 of the Act, and the same has not been challenged by the State and has attained finality between the parties. Learned counsel for the parties also could not dispute the fact that except the award dated 4.2.2004 passed in Iqbal Singh's case which is subject matter of the present appeal (RFA No.1263 of 2004), and judgment dated 29.5.2008 passed in Darshan Singh's case (RFA No.102 of 1991) pertaining to village Nanakpura , there are no other guiding factors for determining the market value of the land in these cases. On the basis of the aforesaid facts, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the claimants submitted before this Court that it has been settled by a catena of judgments that the same compensation is to be awarded to the lands which have been acquired for the same purpose and of the same kind and such lands are contiguous. Thus, they have prayed that the compensation be awarded to the claimants at the rate of Rs.4,84000/- as awarded to the claimants in Darshan Singh's case (supra). There is no dispute with the aforesaid proposition of law that in case the lands are acquired for the same purpose by same notification same compensation is to be granted however, in the present case it is not in dispute that the land of village Nanakpura was acquired vide notification dated 19.9.1985 whereas in the present case land of village Dugri was acquired vide notification RFA No.1263 of 2004 9 dated 30.11.1982 Faced with the aforesaid situation Mr.Saini has argued before this Court that the market value be determined by applying a suitable cut on the land price fixed in Darshan Singh's case, keeping in view the principles as applied and judicially accepted in the cases where the market value is determined for a land which has been acquired at a later date and where the judicial precedence of yester years is made the basis for determination of such a market value and applying the same principles reversely. On the other hand, Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, Deputy Advocate General,Punjab, has vehemently repelled the aforesaid arguments raised by the learned counsel for the appellants and has submitted that the principle of giving increase of escalation of price on yearly basis cannot be applied in reverse manner, and in the present appeal there is no scope of enhancement of compensation as there is no evidence on the basis of which such an increase could be given. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the impugned award and the judgments in Darshan's Singh case. The facts of this case are not in dispute. In fact is is not in dispute that after the remand in Iqbal Singh's case which has arisen out of the same acquisition, the Reference Court has determined the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.2,05,000/- per acre for chahi and Rs.1,16,000/- for barani land and the appellants in the other 32 connected appeals are at least entitled to the same enhancement. It is also not in dispute that land of village Nanakpura and Dugri were acquired for the same purpose i.e. construction of SYL-Canal and land acquired in these two village is contiguous. Again there is no dispute that both the villages are RFA No.1263 of 2004 10 near Ropar Township and have potentiality for future growth. Except the fact that land of village Nanakpura was acquired later then the land of village Dugri, there is no other distinction between the two lands. It is also correct that same compensation as determined in Darshan Singh's case cannot be awarded due to the different dates of acquisition but one fact is established on record from the judgment of Darshan Singh's case (supra) that there was definitely a rising trend in the market price. Even there is no principle to apply a cut by applying formula of yearly increase due to escalation of prices in a reverse manner as argued by the appellants, however, it is also well settled that some guess work is involved in the assessment of every land acquisition case and in such like cases sometimes rule of thumb is to be applied. Keeping in view the cumulative effect of all these factors i.e. land of village Nanakpura which was acquired on 19.9.1985 was assessed at Rs.4,84,000/- per acre and land of village Dugri was acquired for the same purpose on 30.11.1982, land is of same kind; lands of both the villages are contiguous, there was a rising trend of prices, even after remand the Reference Court has allowed compensation for the same land and Rs.2,05,000/- per acre for chahi and Rs.1,16,000/- per acre for barani land, this Court is of the view that it will be in the interest of justice if market value of the land in dispute is determined at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per acre for chahi land and Rs.25,000/- per acre for barani land over and above the rates as determined by the Reference Court in Iqbal Singh's case vide award dated 4.2.2004 (i.e.subject matter of RFA No.1263 of 2004). Thus, all these appeals are allowed in the aforesaid terms. RFA Nos. 2070,2071,2072 and 2073 filed on behalf of the State, are dismissed. RFA No.1263 of 2004 11 Needless to say that the appellants are entitled to the statutory benefits also. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge. August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 12 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.381 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Sham Lal and others ...Appellants. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 13 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.382 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Swaran Singh and another ...Appellants. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 14 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.383 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Ajit Singh and others ...Appellants. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 15 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.384 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Chet Ram deceased through L.Rs ...Appellant. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 16 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.385 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Parbati ...Appellant. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 17 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.386 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Anant Ram ...Appellant. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 18 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.387 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Gurbax Singh deceased now represented through legal representatives ...Appellants. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 19 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.392 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Parkash ...Appellant. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 20 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.394 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Amar Singh deceased now represented through his legal representatives and others ...Appellants. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 21 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.395 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Durga Ram alias Durga Dass ...Appellant. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 22 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.396 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Rakha ...Appellant. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 23 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.648 of 1992 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Lachhmi Devi legal representative of Shiv Ram deceased ...Appellant. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 24 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.649 of 1992 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Roshan legal representative of Norang deceased ...Appellant. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 25 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.651 of 1992 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Roshan Lal ...Appellant. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 26 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.652 of 1992 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Roshan legal representative of deceased Norang ...Appellant. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 27 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.388 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Parkash Singh ...Appellant. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 28 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.389 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Kashmiri Lal ...Appellant. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 29 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.390 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Daya Ram deceased through LRS and others ...Appellants. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 30 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.391 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Swaran Singh ...Appellant. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 31 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.393 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Mohinder Singh ...Appellant. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 32 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.397 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Gurbax Singhl and others ...Appellants. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 33 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.398 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Sant Ram deceased through L.Rsa ...Appellant. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 34 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.399 of 1991 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Surjit Kaur ...Appellant vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil, DAG Punjab, for the State. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral). For orders, see RFA No.1263 of 2004. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 18, 2011 rk RFA No.1263 of 2004 35 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. RFA No.884 of 1992 Date of decision: 18.8.2011 Daya Ram deceased now represented by Daulat Ram his legal representative and others ...Appellants. vs State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellant(s). Mr.Sandeep Moudgil,