In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh R. F. A No. 4983 of 2010 (O&M) Dharam Pal and others ..... Appellants vs State of Haryana and others .... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. S. K. Jain, Advocate, for the appellants. Rajesh Bindal J. Challenge in the present application is to the award of the learned court below passed in reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, seeking apportionment of the compensation. Learned counsel for the landowners submitted that the appellants in the present case were in exclusive possession of the joint land and hence they would be entitled to the entire compensation therefrom even on account of acquisition as it is only they who had suffered on account of acquisition. After hearing learned counsel for the appellants, I do not find any merit in the submissions made. Learned court below while disposing of the reference opined that the land being in joint khewat, the respective shares of the co-sharers can be decided only after the Collector determines their respective shares in the partition proceedings pending before the revenue authorities. The apprehension of the learned counsel for the appellants that the some of the co- sharers having disposed of their share may not be held entitled to compensation, is totally misconceived as the Collector will decide the issue regarding partition of the land in joint khewat pending before him after considering the respective contentions of all the share holders. In view of my aforesaid discussion, the present appeal is dismissed. 5.10.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge