RFA No. 3277 of 1993 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh RFA No. 3277 of 1993 (O&M) Date of decision :25.8.2010 The State of Punjab and another ..... Appellants vs Sardarni Ravinder Kaur and another ..... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Yatinder Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Rohit Kumar, Advocate, for the respondents. Rajesh Bindal J. The State has filed the present appeal seeking reduction of compensation awarded by the court below for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 18.8.1979 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), the State of Punjab acquired land situated within the revenue estate of village Boot, Hadbast No. 300, Tehsil and District Jalandhar, for establishment of Chara Mandi Jalandhar. The Land Acquisition Collector pronounced award no. 1 of 1982 on 19.5.1982. As the landowners came to know about the compensation awarded by the Collector on 5.5.1987, they file reference on 18.5.1987, which was allowed by the court below and market value of the acquired land was determined @ ` 1,058/- per marla vide award dated 29.5.1993. It is this award which is impugned in the present appeal. Learned State counsel submitted that the court below had wrongly decided the issue with regard to limitation. The award by the Collector was announced on 19.5.1982. The reference by the landowners was filed after expiry of five years on 18.5.1987. It was submitted that before announcement of the award by the Collector, munadi was got conducted in the village. It was submitted that since the landowners did not file the objections within time, the court below should have dismissed the same. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents/landowners submitted that the objections were filed within limitation. It was submitted that no notice was served upon the respondents. They were residing at Delhi at the time of acquisition of land and announcement of award. They came to know about the RFA No. 3277 of 1993 (2) passing of the award only on 5.5.1987 and immediately thereafter, they filed objections on 18.5.1987. The court below had rightly considered the same within limitation which does not call for any interference. The prayer was for dismissal of the appeal with cost. Heard learned counsel for the parties. It is admitted by the appellant before the court below that no notice was served upon the respondents herein. The munadi was conducted in the village whereas the respondents were residing at Delhi and even their attorney is also residing in the city at Jalandhar. The State has failed to prove that the landowners were in the knowledge of the award by the Collector. Even the amount of compensation awarded remained with the Collector and no one had withdrawn the same. On the other hand, as per the evidence led by the respondents, they came to know about the pronouncement of award only on 5.5.1987 from Wing Commander Parampreet Singh. Further more, as per Ex. R-9, notices were only issued to Narinder Kaur and Parampreet Singh co-sharers but not to the present landowners. Since it was admitted by the appellant authorities before the court below that they did not issue notice to the present landowners, no fault can be found with the award of the court below. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 25.8.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge