RFA No. 637 of 2004 1 In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. RFA No. 637 of 2004 Decided on 9.12.2010 Union Territory, Chandigath through the Land Acquisition Collector,U.T.Chandigarh --Appellant Vs. Achhar Singh and another --Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.Deepak Sharma,Advocate. for the appellants (U.T.Chandigarh) in RFA Nos.637 to 662d of 2004 Mr.R.K.Dhiman,Advocate,for the appellants in RFA Nos. 1526,2309,2491,2568,2570 of 2004 and 1437of 2005 Mr.Vishal Sodhi,Advocate,for the respondents in RFA Nos. 1526,2309,2491,2568,2570 of 2004 and 1437of 2005 Mr. P. C. Dhiman, Advocate, for the Cross objectors/claimants in X obj No.3-CI of 2005 in RFA Nos. 641 of 2004,X obj No. 2-CI of 2005 in RFA No.646 of 2004, X obj No.171-CI of 2010 in RFA No.654 of 2004, X obj No.170-CI of 2010 in RFA No. 647 of 2004, X obj No. 172-C of 2010 in RFA No.660 of 2004 and X obj No.169-CI of 2010 in RFA No.650 of 2004. Rakesh Kumar Jain, J, (Oral) This order shall dispose of bunch of 32 appeals, out of which RFA Nos. 637of 2004 to 662 of 2004, are filed by Union RFA No. 637 of 2004 2 Territory, Chandigarh, whereas RFA Nos. 1526,2309, 2491,2568,2570 of 2004 and 1437 of 2005, are filed by the claimants. In the appeals filed by the Union Territory, Chandigarh, cross objections bearing Nos.X obj.No.3-C1 of 2005 in RFA No.641 of 2004,X obj.No.2-C1 of 2005 in RFA No.646 of 2004, Xobj.No.171-C1 of 2010 in RFA No.654 of 2004,X obj.No.170-C1 of 2010 in RFA No.647 of 2004, X obj.No.172-C1 of 2010 in RFA No.660 of 2004 and X obj.No.169-C1 of 2010 in RFA No.650 of 2004, have been filed by the cross objectors/claimants. In brief, the land was acquired under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Collector, 1894 (for short, 'the Collector') on 14.5.1998, for public purpose, namely for development of III Phase, Sector 52, Chandigarh. The land was acquired along with super structure and fruit bearing and non fruit bearing trees. The claimants were not satisfied with the award of the Collector, therefore, they filed references for revising the value of the land as well as of the super structure and fruit bearing and non fruit bearing trees. On the pleadings of the parties, issues were framed, out of which issue No. 2 is relevant for the purpose of adjudication of these cases as it pertains to the market value of the super structure at the time of acquisition. Learned Reference Court assessed the market value of the fruit bearing and non fruit bearing trees @ 175% over and above the award of the Collector and gave 25% increase on account of increase in the price index over and above the actual amount of RFA No. 637 of 2004 3 compensation assessed by the respondent. Aggrieved against the decision on issue No.2, the U.T. Chandigarh, filed aforesaid 26 appeals. In these appeals, the claimants have filed cross objections in six appeals. Similarly, the claimants have filed six appeals separately for the purpose of enhancement of compensation for super structure. Mr.Deepak Sharma and Mr.Vishal Sodhi, learned counsel for U.T. Chandigarh in the appeals filed by them have submitted that the matter with regard to the value of the non fruit bearing trees has been settled by this Court in RFA No.2804 of 2008(O&M) titled as Joginder Singh Vs. Union Territory,Chandigarh, decided by Hon'ble Mr.Justice Rajesh Bindal, on 10.3.2010, who gave 100% increase in the valuation of non fruit bearing trees instead of 175% increase. This fact is admitted by Mr.P.C.Dhiman, learned counsel appearing for the cross objectors/claimants as well as Mr.R.K.Dhiman, learned counsel for the claimants in the appeals filed by him. In view thereof, the first issue as to whether the increase in the non fruit bearing trees would be 100% or 175% goes in favour of the Union Territory Chandigarh and is decided in terms of the order passed in RFA No.2804 of 2008(O&M) titled as Joginder Singh Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh, decided on 10.3.2010. Accordingly, the award of the reference Court is modified to that extent. Now adverting to the cases of the claimants where they have prayed for further increase in the value of super structure. As already noticed, the reference Court has granted 25% RFA No. 637 of 2004 4 increase on the value assessed in respect of the super structure which is now maintained by this Court in RFA No. 3066 of 2005 (Prithipal Singh Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh through Land Acquisition Collector), decided on 11.5.2009, wherein increase of 25% has been given on PWD rates. In view thereof, Mr.R.K.Dhiman Advocate, submits that he has no grievance left to be redressed by this Court. Hence, the appeals filed by him on behalf of the claimants i.e. RFA Nos. 1526,2309, 2491,2568,2570 of 2004 and 1437 of 2005, for the purpose of enhancement of the value of super structure over and above 25% increase are hereby dismissed. Insofar as the cross objections are concerned, Mr.P.C.Dhiman, has relied upon a decision of this Court rendered in RFA No.3066 of 2005 (Prithipal Singh Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh through Land Acquisition Collector), decided on 11.5.2009. In the said case, the Collector had assessed the value of the super structure at the scrap rate that the Court had allowed it to be assessed at the PWD rates with 25% increase thereon. Since the matters are squarely covered by a decision of this Court rendered in RFA No. 3066 of 2005 (Prithipal Singh Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh through Land Acquisition Collector), decided on 11.5.2009, therefore, the cross objections filed by Mr.P.C.Dhiman, Advocate, are also disposed of in terms of that order. 09.12.2010 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge