RFA No. 390 of 2005 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA At CHANDIGARH R.F.A. No. 390 of 2005 (O&M) Date of decision: 11.5.2011 Jai Bhagwan @ Jai Bhagwan Malik and others .. Appellants vs State of Haryana and another .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Rahul Wadehra, Advocate for Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. ... Rajesh Bindal J. The landowners have filed the appeal seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. Briefly the facts are that vide notification dated 12.9.2001 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') the State of Haryana sought to acquire land situated within the revenue estate of village Patti Taraf Afgan, Hadabst No. 17, Tehsil and District Panipat for shifting of dyeing units in Sector 29 Part-II, Panipat. It was followed by notification under Section 6 of the Act dated 1.3.2002. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, 'the Collector') assessed the compensation for the acquired land @ ` 3,50,000/- per acre. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below determined the market value of the acquired land @ ` 259.91 per square yard. Aggrieved against the award of learned Court below, the landowners are before this Court. RFA No. 390 of 2005 [2] Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the issue raised in the present appeal is squarely covered by judgment of this court in R. A. No. 6-CI of 2008 in RFA No. 363 of 2005- Ram Chand @ Ram Chander (since deceased) through LR Raghbir Singh vs State of Haryana and others, decided on 29.5.2009, whereby the amount of compensation payable to the land owners vide same notification was assessed @ ` 16,08,000/- per acre. Learned State counsel did not dispute the aforesaid factual position. Accordingly, for the reasons recorded in Ram Chand's case (supra), the present appeal is disposed of in the same terms. 11.5.2011 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge