R. F. A No. 2632 of 1990 1 In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh RFA No. 2632 of 1990 (O&M) Date of decision : 23.3.2011 Punjab State and another ..... Appellants vs Kehar Singh .... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Yatinder Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Rajesh Bindal J. This order will dispose of appeals bearing RFA Nos. 2632 to 2634 of 1990, as common questions of law and facts are involved therein. The State of Punjab has filed these appeals seeking reduction of compensation awarded to the landowners for the acquired land. Briefly the facts are that vide notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), dated 28.2.1985, Punjab Government sought to acquire land situated within the revenue estates of villages Raili and Bhalowal, Tehsil Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur, for construction of Power House No. 3. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, 'the Collector') vide award dated 16.2.1987 determined the compensation for the acquired land @ ` 10,000/- per acre for barani, ` 5,000/- per acre for banjar qadim and gair mumkin kinds of land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned Court below determined the market value of the acquired land @ ` 25,000/- per acre for barani and ` 18,000/- per acre for banjar qadim kind of land. It is this award which is impugned by the State of Punjab in the present set of appeals. R. F. A No. 2632 of 1990 2 Learned State counsel very fairly submitted that the issue involved in the present set of appeals is squarely covered by judgment of this court in RFA No. 2627 of 1990 – Punjab State through SDO (C)-cum- LAC Dasuya and another vs Mansha Ram and others, decided on 12.12.2008, whereby the award of the learned court below for the land acquired vide same notification, was upheld. Since this court in Mansha Ram's case (supra) had upheld the award of the learned court below, the appeals filed by the State do not survive. Accordingly, the same are dismissed. 23.3.2011 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge