RFA No. 976 of 1994 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh RFA No. 976 of 1994 (O&M) Date of decision : 17.9.2010 Bhajan Kaur ... Appellant vs The State of Punjab ..... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Naresh Kaushal, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Yatinder Shama, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Rajesh Bindal J. The landowner is in appeal before this Court against the award passed by learned court below seeking enhancement of compensation for the tubewell etc. existing on the acquired land. Briefly, the facts are that State of Punjab vide notification dated 19.11.1980 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act') acquired land along with tubewell/ superstructures existing thereon situated within the revenue estate of Village Mataur, Hadbast No. 7, Tehsil Kharar, District Ropar (Now District Mohali) for public purpose. The Land Acquisition Collector vide award dated 4.12.1986 assessed the market value of the superstructures existing on the acquired land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowner filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below vide award dated 4.12.1993, assessed the compensation at ` 30,000/- for the superstructure. It is this award which is impugned in the present appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the court below had not assessed just and fair compensation for the tubewell, etc. existing on the land acquired. It was submitted that the court below had wrongly discarded the evidence of appellant while assessing the market value of the superstructures. The submission was that considering the evidence led by the appellant, just and fair compensation regarding the superstructures existing on the acquired land be awarded. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that just and fair compensation had been awarded to the landowner by considering the evidence and value of the superstructures at the time of acquisition, which does not call for any interference. RFA No. 976 of 1994 (2) No other point was raised by either of the parties. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper-book. The appellant claimed compensation of ` 50,000/- for the acquired tubewell, room, chabacha, pucca khadda. It is always that some rough estimate is made by applying a thumb rule and assessment in such type of cases cannot be made with mathematical exactitude. The claimants always make exorbitant claims for the superstructures, whereas the State functionaries estimate the value thereof at its lowest price. The Collector had determined the market value of the superstructures at ` 4,282/- but the court below after considering the evidence led by the appellant rightly determined the compensation of ` 30,000/-, which cannot be said to be inadequate. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 17.9.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge