R.F.A. No. 953 of 2008 [ 1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.F.A. No. 953 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: 31.1.2011 State of Haryana .. Appellant v. Smt. Sukhdevi and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. D. D. Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. ... Rajesh Bindal J. The State is before this Court against the award of the learned court below seeking reduction in the amount of compensation awarded to the land owners. Briefly, the facts are that land measuring 46 kanals and 18 marlas, situated in village Karela, District Jind was sought to be acquired by the State Government vide notification dated 6.2.2002, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act') for construction of Gatauli-Karela Drain. The same was followed by notification dated 3.6.2002, issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 1,25,000/- per acre for Nehri land and ` 80,000/- per acre for Barani land. Aggrieved against the award of the Collector, the land owners filed objections which were referred to the learned court below, who keeping in view the material placed on record by the parties, assessed the market value of the acquired land at ` 2,50,000/- per acre for Nehri land and 2,00,000/- per acre for Barani land. Despite service of respondents No. 2 to 14 and 16 to 21, no one had appeared for them. Respondents No. 1 and 15 were reported to have R.F.A. No. 953 of 2008 [ 2] expired. Their legal representatives were also not brought on record. However, learned counsel for the State was fair enough to submit that other appeals arising out of the acquisition have already been decided by this court in R.F.A. No. 2112 of 2006 –Pawan and others v. State of Haryana, decided on 20.1.2011 and after setting aside the award of the learned court below, the mater has been remitted back. For the detailed reasons recorded in Pawan's case (supra), the impugned award of the learned court below is set aside and the case is remitted back to the learned court below for fresh decision. The parties are directed to appear before the learned District Judge, Jind on 5.3.2011. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of. ( Rajesh Bindal ) Judge 31.1.2011 mk