RFA No. 1053 of 1993 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh RFA No. 1053 of 1993 (O&M) Date of decision : 31.8.2010 Atma Singh (deceased) through LRs and another .. Appellants vs The State of Punjab .. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal. Present: None for the appellants. Mr. Yatinder Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Rajesh Bindal, J. The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the landowner seeking further enhancement of compensation on account of acquisition of land. Briefly, the facts are that the land in question, situated in village Mataur, Tehsil Kharar, District Ropar (Now District Mohali) was acquired vide notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act') on 26.12.1969 which was published in the Punjab Government Gazette dated 15.1.1970 for setting up of an Industrial and Residential Urban Estate. It was followed by notification under Section 6 of the Act dated 1.7.1971. The Land Acquisition Collector vide award dated 17.3.1972 assessed the market value of the different kinds of land at different rates. Aggrieved against the award of the Collector, the land owners filed objections which were referred to the learned District Judge, who keeping in view the earlier award dated 25.2.1989, Ex. P-1, determined the market value of the acquired land @ ` 20,000/- per acre for chahi and ` 19,000/- per acre for other kinds of land. It is this award which is impugned in the present appeal. No one has appeared for the appellants. A perusal of the impugned award shows that the court below had determined the market value of the land on the basis of earlier award dated 25.2.1989, Ex. P-1, vide which the market value of the land acquired vide same notification for the same very purpose was assessed. Besides the earlier award, Ex. P-1, no other evidence was led by the appellants before the court below. There is nothing on the record also to show that the award, Ex. P-1, was challenged any further. As there is no other evidence available on record, prima facie, in my RFA No. 1053 of 1993 (2) opinion, no case for any enhancement is made out. However, as no one has appeared for the appellants to assist the court, I deem it appropriate to dismiss the appeal in default. Ordered accordingly. 31.8.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge