In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh R. F. A No. 432 of 1994 (O&M) Vinod Kumar and others ..... Appellants vs Haryana State ..... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: None for the appellants. Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant 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 trees standing on the acquired land. Briefly, the facts of the case are that vide notification dated 18.3.1988 published on 21.9.1988 issued under Section 4 of the Act, the State acquired land along with trees and structure situated within the revenue estate of village Tajewala, Hadbast No. 3, Tehsil Chhachhrauli, District Yamunanagar, for construction of Sutlej Yamuna Link Canal. The Land Acquisition Collector assessed the fair value for 5600 trees. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below dismissed the same vide award dated 4.11.1993. It is this award which is impugned in the present appeal. A perusal of the award of the court below shows that no evidence was led by the appellants in support of their claim. Before the Collector he had given the quantity of trees as 7000 whereas in the reference before the court below he had mentioned the same as 8000. He had produced the receipts Ex. PA to Ex. PG for the purchase of the plants but no evidence was led for the plantation thereof. On the other hand, the State Government produced the report, Ex. R1 prepared by RW Rajinder Singh, Junior Engineer after visiting at the spot. As no documentary evidence was led, prima facie, in my opinion, no case for enhancement is made out. However, as no one has appeared for the appellants, the present appeal is dismissed in default. 27.8.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge