R. F. A No. 2446 of 1998 1 In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh R. F. A No. 2446 of 1998 (O&M) Date of decision : 24.9.2008 Satish Chand and others ..... Appellants vs State of Haryana and others ..... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. R. A. Yadav, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. H. S. Hooda, Advocate General, Haryana with Mr. Rajiv Kawatra, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal J. The landowners are in appeal before this court against the award of the learned court below passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the State of Haryana vide notification dated 22.3.1990 issued under Section 4 of the Act, acquired 580.73 acres land situated in revenue estate of Villages Jharsa and Islampur, Tehsil and District Gurgaon, for public purpose namely for the development and utilisation of land as residential, commercial and institutional area. The Land Acquisition Collector vide his award dated 16.3.1993 assessed the market value of the land as under:- Villages Jharsa and Silokhra Chahi Rs. 4 lacs per acre Magda Rs. 3.5 lacs per acre Abi Rs. 3.5 lacs per acre Banjar Rs. 2.5 lacs per acre Gair Mumkin Rs. 2.5 lacs per acre Village Islampur Chahi Rs. 2.5 lacs per acre Magda Rs. 2 lacs per acre Banjar Rs. 1.5 lacs per acre Gair Mumkin Rs. 1.5 lacs per acre On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below vide award dated 31.3.1998, determined the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 265/- per square yard. R. F. A No. 2446 of 1998 2 Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the claim made by the appellants in the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgment of this court in R.F.A. No. 944 of 1998 – Suraj Bhan and another vs State of Haryana and others, decided on 13.5.1999, whereby the compensation payable to the landowners was reduced to Rs. 212/- per square yard. Learned Advocate General, Haryana, appearing for the State did not dispute this fact. Since the compensation payable to the landowners for the acquisition of land was reduced by this court in Suraj Bhan's case (supra), the present appeal does not survive. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 24.9.2008 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge