R.F.A. No. 2487 of 1989 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.F.A. No. 2487 of 1989 (O&M) Date of decision: 27.1.2011 Lal Chand (deceased) through LRs and others .. Appellants v. State of Haryana and another .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Akshay Jain, Advocate for Mr. S. K. Jain, Advocate for theappellants. Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. ... Rajesh Bindal J. The land owners are in appeal seeking further enhancement of compensation for the acquired land awarded by the learned court below. Briefly, the facts of the case are that vide notification dated 12.3.1982, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act'), State of Haryana acquired 24 kanals and 8 marlas of land in village Meham, District Rohtak for construction of bus stand at Meham. The same was followed by notification dated 9.2.1983, issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector'), vide his award dated 14.5.1985, assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 12,000/- per acre. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the land owners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 24,000/- per acre. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that in the present case, prime land in Meham was acquired for construction of bus stand. It R.F.A. No. 2487 of 1989 [2] had great future potentiality, but still the learned court below has merely enhanced the amount of compensation from ` 12,000/- per acre to ` 24,000/- per acre, whereas the value thereof was not less than ` 200/- per square yard. The learned court below has failed to consider sale deed (Ex. P1), vide which 500 square yards of plot was sold for ` 34,000/-. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that the learned court below rightly discarded sale instance (Ex. P1), as the same was registered on 29.7.1986, i.e., more than 4 years after the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act in the present case. He further submitted that the appellants having led no other documentary evidence on record in support of their claim, even ` 24,000/- per acre awarded by the learned court below is without any basis. However, still as the State is not in appeal, the land owners should feel satisfied with the amount already awarded. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant referred record. A perusal of the impugned award shows that the only sale deed produced by the land owners on record, namely, Ex. P1 was registered on 29.7.1986, whereas notification under Section 4 of the Act in the present case was issued on 12.3.1982. Accordingly, the same cannot be said to be relevant for the purpose of assessment of fair value of the acquired land. Except the aforesaid sale deed, there being no other documentary evidence referred to by learned counsel for the appellants to justify their claim for seeking enhancement of compensation, I do not find any illegality has been committed by the learned court below in assessing the compensation for the acquired land @ ` 24,000/- per acre. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. ( Rajesh Bindal ) Judge 27.1.2011 mk