RFA No.402 of 1990 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA No.402 of 1990 Date of Decision: 12.5.2008 Gian Singh and another ..Appellants. Vs. Punjab State and another ..Respondents. CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN * * * Present: None for the appellants. Mr.P.C.Goyal, Sr.DAG Punjab for respondent No.2. * * * Rakesh Kumar Jain, J. This appeal is directed against the order of District Judge, Rupnagar dated 1.12.1989 whereby in a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the `Act'), compensation of Rs.10,000/- has been awarded in respect of Well and Chabacha along with solatium at the rate of 30% of the market value besides additional amount @ 12% per annum under Section 23(1-A) of the Act. It was also directed that the interest shall be paid as per Section 28 of the Act. Briefly stated, the facts are that the Well and Chabacha belonging to the appellants was acquired and respondent No.1 vide his Award No.394 dated 5.2.1987 awarded Rs.7610/- for the same. Dissatisfied with the award, Objections under Section 18 of the Act were filed by the appellants before respondent No.1 which were referred to the Civil Court and were converted into Land Reference No.340 dated 15.9.1988. In the RFA No.402 of 1990 -2- Objections under Section 18, the appellants had claimed a compensation of super structure referred to above to the tune of Rs.40,000/-. However, in the written statement, the claim of the appellants was controverted by the respondents and urged that adequate compensation has been awarded. The parties to the litigation went to the trial on the following issues : 1. Whether the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector is inadequate ? If so, to what extent ? OPP. 2. Whether the claimants are entitled to enhancement of compensation? If so, to what effect ? OPP. 3. Relief. Both the parties led oral as well as documentary evidence inasmuch as the appellants as well as the respondents placed on record their respective assessment of the acquired property. The Court below relying upon Ex.R-I and Ex.R-2 found that the assessed amount of the acquired property is Rs.7610/- but still it was enhanced to Rs.10,000/-. I have gone through the order of the Court below and have also perused the record. In my opinion, the compensation that has been awarded is adequate and the order of the Court below does not call for any interference. RW1 Upinder Singh, Junior Engineer Civil, Ropar Thermal Plant, Ropar had categorically stated that he had visited the spot on 17.12.1982 and made assessment of open Well as per the abstract of quantity Ex.R1 and abstract of costs Ex.R2 for which CSR rates were applied and the measurements were taken in the presence of the claimant-appellant after making depreciation charges at 1% per annum. He had arrived at a figure of Rs.7610/-. The Court below further enhanced that amount to Rs.10,000/- having noticed that there were some cuttings in the abstract of quantities RFA No.402 of 1990 -3- which remained unexplained. In my view, the compensation awarded is adequate and so far as the evidence that has been led by the appellants in respect of the estimate, the witness who had appeared on their behalf did not satisfy as to what rates have been applied by him while preparing the estimate and also admitted that he did not get the property verified from the Sarpanch or Nambardar of the village. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I find no illegality in the order dated 1.12.1989 passed by the District Judge, Rupnagar. Therefore, the present appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. (Rakesh Kumar Jain) 12.5.2008 Judge Meenu