R.F.A. No. 1192 of 1992 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. R.F.A. No. 1192 of 1992 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.8.2010 Harbans Lal .... Appellant vs. State of Punjab and another .... Respondents Coram : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present:- Mr. B. S. Bhalla, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Yatinder Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. RAJESH BINDAL, J This order will dispose of appeals bearing RFA Nos. 1192, 2306, 2442 and 3023 of 1992 arising out of common acquisition. The landowners have filed appeals seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. Briefly the facts are that vide notification dated 5.5.1982 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') the State of Punjab acquired land measuring 115 acres 5 kanals 14 marlas situated in the revenue estate Kotkapura, District Faridkot, for setting up of New Mandi Township at Kotkapura. The same was followed by notification dated 19.1.1984 issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, 'the Collector') awarded compensation @ ` 80,000/- per acre for Block-A, ` 52,000/- per acre for Block-B and ` 35,000/- per acre for Block-C. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference, the learned court below while relying upon earlier judgment of this court in RFA No. 466 of 1988- Jai Kaur vs State of Punjab and another, decided on 9.4.1990 (Ex. P-8), assessed the compensation for the acquired land @ ` 37/- per square yard. Aggrieved against the award of learned Court below, the present appeals have been filed. A perusal of the impugned award shows that the court below while assessing the market value of the acquired land in the present case had relied upon judgment of this court in Jai Kaur's case (supra), vide which the value of the land acquired vide notification of the same date for the same very purpose was assessed at ` 37/- per square yard. There is nothing on record to show that judgment of this court in Jai Kaur's case (supra) was further challenged and compensation has been enhanced further. R.F.A. No. 1192 of 1992 -2- Since the court below has awarded compensation while relying upon judgment of this court vide which value of the land acquired vide same notification and for the same very purpose had been assessed, no case for any further enhancement is made out. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed. 23.8.2010. (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge