1 R.F.A. No. 3298 of 1993 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH --- Regular First Appeal No. 3298 of 1993 Date of Decision: 20.8.2009 Man Singh --- Appellant Versus State of Haryana --- Respondent --- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL *** PRESENT: Mr. Pritam Saini, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Ashish Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent. --- AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J This is land-owner’s appeal for enhancement of compensation in respect of the acquired land. Agricultural land measuring 2 Kanals 4 Marlas of the appellant situated in the revenue estate of village Nachraun, Sub Tehsil Radaur, District Yamuna Nagar was acquired by the Haryana Government by issuing notifications dated 12.1.1982 and 15.1.1982, under Sections 4 and 6 respectively, of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”), for a public purpose, namely, for 2 R.F.A. No. 3298 of 1993 remodeling of the Radaur drain. The Land Acquisition Collector vide award dated 17.9.1986 awarded compensation in respect of the said land as under: i- Rs. 16,000/- per acre for Chahi land; ii- Rs. 10,000/- per acre for Barani land; and iii- Rs. 8,000/- per acre for Banjar and Gair mumkin Naddi and for Gair mumkin Rasta. On a reference being sought by the appellant under Section 18 of the Act, The Reference Court vide its award dated 6.8.1993 enhanced the amount of compensation substituting the figures of Rs. 20,000/-; Rs. 15,000/- and Rs. 10,000/- respectively, in respect of the three kinds of land mentioned in the award of the Land Acquisition Collector. Besides the above, the appellant was awarded the amount equivalent to 12% per annum on such market value, under the provisions of Section 23(1-A) of the Act, for the period commencing from the date of notification viz. 12.1.1982 till the date of the award dated 17.9.1986. The appellant was also awarded solatium at the rate of 30% on the aforesaid market value, under the provisions of Section 23(2) of the Act. Additionally, the appellant was granted benefit of Section 28 of the Act by ordering that the Collector shall pay to the appellant the interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the enhanced amount of compensation from the date of taking of the possession of the land, for a period of one year and thereafter he will 3 R.F.A. No. 3298 of 1993 be paid interest at the rate of 15% on the enhanced amount of compensation till the same was actually paid. It is this award of the Reference Court which has been impugned in this appeal by the land-owner/claimant seeking enhancement of amount of compensation. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and have perused the record with their assistance. Before the Reference Court, the claimants had produced a sale instance in the shape of a sale deed dated 8.6.1992, Exhibit P1, whereby an area measuring 8 Kanals had been sold for a sale consideration of Rs. 30,000/-. The State of Haryana on other hand had produced four sale instances in the form of sale deeds, Exhibits RA, RB, RC and RD, whereby the sale of land was effected at the following rates: SALE DEEDS AREA SOLD RATE AT WHICH SOLD Exhibit RA 86 Kanals 11 Marlas 4,000/ - per acre Exhibit RB 1 Kanal 13 Marlas 4,800/ - per acre Exhibit RC 48 Kanals 4 Marlas 8,000/ - per acre Exhibit RD 4 Kanals 11 Marlas 16,000/ - per acre The Reference Court did not take into consideration the sale instance, Exhibit P-1, produced by the claimants, on the ground that the said transaction had taken place after the date of the notification under Section 4 of the Act issued in the instant case. The Reference Court accordingly determined the market value for various kinds of land at the rates already mentioned above. 4 R.F.A. No. 3298 of 1993 Learned counsel appearing for the appellant could not refer to any evidence or material on the record on the basis of which he could persuade this Court to come to the conclusion that the market value of the acquired land was required to be fixed at the higher rate than it had been fixed by the reference court. In this view of the matter, the market value of the acquired land as fixed by the reference court cannot be faulted with. There is, thus, no merit in the appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) August 20, 2009 JUDGE *RKMALIK*