RFA No. 415 of 1996 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 9.3.2010 (1) R.F.A. No. 415 of 1996 (O&M) Smt. Manhari and others ... Appellants. v. State of Haryana and others .. Respondents (2) R.F.A. No. 416 of 1996 (O&M) Balbir Singh and others ... Appellants. v. State of Haryana .. Respondent (3) R.F.A. No. 417 of 1996 (O&M) Shri Panna ... Appellant v. State of Haryana .. Respondent (4) R.F.A. No. 721 of 1996 (O&M) Subhash Chander ... Appellant v. Haryana State and another .. Respondents (5) R.F.A. No. 722 of 1996 (O&M) Darya and others ... Appellants v. State of Haryana and another .. Respondents (6) R.F.A. No. 723 of 1996 (O&M) Shiv Lal ... Appellant v. State of Haryana and others .. Respondents RFA No. 415 of 1996 [2] (7) R.F.A. No. 907 of 1996 (O&M) Bugli Devi and others ... Appellants. v. State of Haryana .. Respondent (8) R.F.A. No. 1198 of 1996 (O&M) Smt. Manhari and others ... Appellants. v. State of Haryana and others .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. V. D. Sharma, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. ... Rajesh Bindal J. This order shall dispose of the above mentioned appeals, as the same arise out of a common acquisition. The land owners are in appeal seeking further enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. The facts have been extracted from R. F. A. No. 415 of 1996. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the State of Haryana vide notification dated 16.11.1987, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “the Act”), acquired the land within the revenue estate of Gudha for construction of Gudha to Sheikhpura link road. The same was followed vide notification dated 10.3.1987, issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') assessed the market value at Rs. 45,000/- per acre for chahi, chahi-nehri, gair mumkin, garha khad, bara, khand (Grain land); Rs. 40,000/- per acre for nehri, i.e., canal irrigated land and Rs. 15,000/- per acre for gair mumkin tatian, grave yard rasta and baithak mavashian kind of land. The landowners/claimants feeling dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Collector, filed objections. The learned court below dismissed the references vide impugned award, which is under challenge in the present set of appeals. RFA No. 415 of 1996 [3] Learned counsel for the land owners submitted that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the evidence led by them on record in the form of two sale deeds (Ex. P1 and Ex. P2). Vide sale deed Ex. P1, 12 marlas of plot in village Gudha was sold on 5.2.1987 for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- and vide sale deed Ex. P2, 14 marlas of plot in village Gudha was sold for Rs. 31,500/- on 10.2.1987. They were not located far off from the acquired land, which was also for the purpose of laying of a road from village Gudha to Sheikhpura. The submission is that even if the sale transactions produced on record by the land owners were for a small piece of land, a reasonable cut can be applied thereon for the purpose of determination of fair value of the acquired land. The sale deeds cannot be discarded as such. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that it is a case of practically no evidence. The land in question was admittedly agricultural in nature when the same was acquired for the purpose of metalling of a kacha path. The sale deeds produced by the land owners were registered after the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act and further they were forming part of the abadi area. For the aforesaid reasons, the same cannot be relied upon to determine the fair value of the acquired land. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant referred record. The land in question was acquired vide notification dated 16.11.1987. The object is for construction of a metalled road as against a kacha path, which was existing from village Gudha to Sheikhpura. The two sale deeds produced by the land owners (Ex. P1 and Ex. P2) were registered on 5.2.1987 and 10.2.1987 respectively and were for small plots of land abutting Panipat-Assandh road measuring 12 marlas and 14 marlas respectively, which cannot possibly be equated with the acquired land. For the reasons mentioned above, I do not find that any case has been made out by the land owners for enhancement of compensation on account of acquisition of land. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge 9.3.2010 mk