RFA No. 2936 of 1992 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 11.5.2009 R. F. A. No. 2936 of 1992 (O&M) Nihal Singh (deceased) through LRs and others .. Appellants v. The State of Haryana and another .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Ajay Jain, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana for the State. Rajesh Bindal J. The land owners have approached this court through the present appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned court below. Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 7.9.1988, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act'), the State of Haryana acquired 2131 kanals 14 marlas of land in village Agroha, for construction of Maharaja Aggarsen Institute of Medical Research and Education, Agroha. The Land Acquisition Collector, Hissar (for short, `the Collector') vide his award dated 25.3.1989 assessed the market value of the land at Rs. 40,000/- per acre for nehri; Rs. 20,000/- per acre for Tal; Rs. 14,000/- per acre for tibba and Rs. 55,000/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the land owners/claimants filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below vide award dated 5.3.1992, assessed the market value of the land at Rs. 50,000/- per acre for nehri; Rs. 25,000/- per acre for tal; Rs. 17,500/- per acre for tibba and Rs. 68,750/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land. Learned counsel for the land owners submitted that the statement of learned counsel for the State appearing on earlier occasion on 30.9.2008 regarding the claim made by the land owners in the present case being squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in R.F.A. No. 388 of 1998 –Pala Singh and another v. State of Haryana and another, decided on 22.8.2008 is not disputed. However, the RFA No. 2936 of 1992 [2] fact remains that the reference filed by the land owners was decided by the learned Court below vide award dated 5.3.1992. Thereafter, in some of the subsequent cases pertaining to the same acquisition, the learned court below had granted more amount of compensation, considering the evidence produced therein in which even the award of the Reference Court passed in the case of the present land owners was also placed on record in evidence by the State. The award of the Reference Court in Pala Singh's case (supra) granting more amount of compensation on account of acquisition of land vide same notification was upheld by this Court. As the land owners in Pala Singh's case (supra) were granted more amount of compensation, the land owners herein are also entitled to same amount. The facts stated by learned counsel for the land owners are not disputed by learned counsel for the State. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I find merit in the submissions made by learned counsel for the land owners. As other land owners for the acquisition carried out vide same notification, have been awarded compensation at a higher price, the same amount of compensation deserves to be paid to all the land owners. As higher amount of compensation, as was determined by the Reference Court in Pala Singh's case (supra), considering the evidence placed on record, has been upheld by this Court, in my opinion, it would be just and fair to award same amount of compensation to the present landowners. Accordingly, it is directed that the appellants/land owners in the present case shall also be entitled to compensation at the rates at which the land owners in Pala Singh's case (supra) have been paid. Ordered accordingly. The appeal is disposed of in the manner indicated above. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge 11.5.2009 mk RFA No. 2936 of 1992 [3]