R. F. A No. 1826 of 1991 1 In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Date of decision : 5.9.2008 1. R. F. A No. 1826 of 1991 Kishan Lal ..... Appellant vs The State of Haryana ..... Respondent 2. R. F. A No. 1827 of 1991 Ranjit and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana ..... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: None for the appellants. Mr. Navneet Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal J. This order will dispose of two Regular First Appeal Nos. 1826 and 1827 of 1991, as the same are arising out of a common award dated 23.10.1989, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Faridabad. However, the facts have been extracted from R. F. A. No. 1826 of 1991. Briefly, the facts are that vide Notification dated 19.6.1987, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), the State of Haryana acquired 64.23 acres of land situated in Village Pali, Hadbast no. 13, Tehsil Ballabgarh, District Faridabad, for the development and utilisation of land for shifting of stone crushers of Faridabad-Ballabgarh Controlled area under the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977. The Collector vide his award dated 17.11.1988, determined the market value of the plain land @ of Rs. 65,000/- per acre. The value of the land comprised in rectangle no. 103, khasra no. 4/2, 5/2, 6/min; rectangle no. 102, khasra no. 10/2; rectangle no. 213, khasra no. 32 was determined at Rs. 20,000/- per acre and price of land comprised in rectangle no. 114, killa no. 6 min was assessed at Rs. 30,000/- per acre. The learned Additional District Judge, on reference upheld the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector. R. F. A No. 1826 of 1991 2 None has appeared for the appellants. Learned counsel for the State very fairly submitted that the claim made by the appellants in the present appeals is squarely covered by the judgment of this court in R. F. A. no. 708 of 1990– Krishan and others vs State of Haryana, decided on 27.9.2006, whereby the market value determined by the Land Acquisition Collector was upheld and the appeal filed by the claimants was dismissed. For the detailed reasons stated in Krishan's case (supra), the present appeals are dismissed. 5.9.2008 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge