IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.F.A.No.1273 of 2005 Date of Decision : 01.12.2010 Avtar Singh ...Appellant Versus Punjab State ...Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: Mr. Naresh Kaushal, Advocate, for the applicant-appellant. Mr. S.S.Sahu, AAG, Punjab, for the respondent. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The present appeal arises out of an Award of the Reference Court dated 08.01.2005 granting compensation of Rs.2,54,725/- alongwith enhancement in value of structure by 12%. The land including super-structure raised by the appellant over the said land was intended to be acquired by the State Government for a public purpose vide notification dated 07.06.1993 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Land Acquisition Collector awarded compensation for the super-structure, as mentioned above. It is a compensation for super-structure alone, which is subject matter of controversy in the present appeal. The land-owner examined PW-2 Amar Singh, who has proved his valuation report Ex.P3. As per the said valuation report, the cost of the super-structure is Rs.5,94,500/-. He has sworn an affidavit that the valuation report has been prepared on the basis of PWD Common Schedule of Rates, 1987 and premium as on 23.06.1994. Some rates have been taken from the market as these were not available with the Common Schedule of Rates. R.F.A.No.1273 of 2005 -2- On the other hand, the respondent-State has examined RW-1 Dinesh Kumar, Assistant Engineer, PWD (B&R), who has assessed the valuation of the super-structure as Rs.2,54,725/-. The reference Court found that the expert produced by the appellant is neither a qualified Engineer or nor a approved Government valuer to assess the value of the super-structure and, therefore, accpeted the valuation report prepared by the Government expert. Learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently argued that the valuation report has not included the valuation of the electric wiring and iron gate and also the fact that the cost of construction has increased manifold from the year 1990 to the year 1996, when the same was acquired. PW-2 Amar Singh is a draftsman. He has deposed that he has experience of valuation of super-structures. There is tendency to inflat valuation by the experts produced by the claimants and to under value the valuation by the Government officials. Therefore to equalise the normal tendency, I deem it appropraite to determine the compensation as average of the two valuations. Therefore, the compensation for the super- structure is determined as Rs.4,24,612/-. The appellant shall be entitled for other statutory benefits i.e. solatium and interest under Sections 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 of the Act, on the compensation amount awarded. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. 01.12.2010 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE C.M.No.3007-CI of 2010 in R.F.A.No.1273 of 2005 Present: Mr. Naresh Kaushal, Advocate, for the applicant-appellant. Mr. S.S.Sahu, AAG, Punjab, for the respondent. *** This is an application for review of the order passed by this Court on 05.11.2009 for the reason that in the appeal, the land-owner is claiming enhanced compensation on account of acquisition of super- structure, which is not the subject matter of any other appeal decided on 05.11.2009. The said fact is not disputed. In view of the above, the order passed by this Court on 05.11.2009 in respect of the applicant/appellant is recalled. The appeal is ordered to be restored to its original number. 01.12.2010 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE