RFA No. 998 of 1994 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R. F. A. No. 998 of 1994 (O&M) Date of decision: May 25,2009 Ujjagar Singh and others .. Appellants v. The State of Punjab and another .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Naresh Kaushal, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Vivek Chauhan, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the State. Mr. H. P. S. Ghuman, Advocate for Greater Mohali Area Development Authority. Rajesh Bindal J. The land owners have approached this court through the present appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned court below on account of acquisition of super structure existing on the acquired land. Briefly, the facts are that tubewell including the material and structure of the appellants was acquired along with the land situated in village Mataur Hadbast No. 7, Tehsil Kharar, District Ropar. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') awarded compensation of Rs. 4,760/-. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the land owners/claimants filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below vide award dated 8.12.1993, assessed the compensation for tubewell and other structures at Rs. 20,000/-. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the court below has not granted appropriate compensation to the land owners on account of acquisition of tubewell and other super structure existing on the land in question. He submitted that as against the estimate of Rs. 61,574.35, only a sum of Rs. 20,000/- has been granted, which is on the lower side. He further submitted that as against the evidence led by the land owners, no evidence was led by the State to controvert the same and accordingly, the same deserves to be relied upon. RFA No. 998 of 1994 [2] On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the land owners in the present case have been awarded compensation much more than what was claimed by them in the application originally filed. However, in the evidence led, the claim was much more as compared to the claim originally filed, which would be totally beyond the pleadings. It was on the basis of guess work that the amount of compensation has been determined by the learned court below which cannot be faulted with, as there is no material as such which could lead to the conclusion that the assessment so made by the learned court below deserves to be set aside and the land owners are entitled to more amount of compensation. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I do not find any merit in the present appeal. In the application, the appellants claimed compensation to the tune of Rs. 25,000/- for tubewell and Rs. 8,000/- for Khada. The Collector assessed the compensation at Rs. 4,760/-, though in the evidence led by the appellants, estimate claiming the value of the tubewell and Khada at Rs. 61,574.35 was produced, but the court below on estimation basis granted compensation at Rs. 20,000/- for tubewell and other structures. Considering the claim made by the appellants originally and also the assessment of compensation on guess work made by the learned court below, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned award. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge May 25,2009 mk