RFA No. 2608 of 1989 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA No. 2608 of 1989 (O&M) Date of decision : 29.10.2010. Goverdhan Dass ..... Appellant vs State of Haryana ..... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. M. S. Jain, Senior Advocate with Mr. Adarsh Jain, Advocate, for the landowners. Mr. D. D. Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal J. This order will dispose of the appeals bearing RFA Nos. 2608 to 2611 of 1989, as the same arise out of common acquisition. The landowners are in appeals 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 acquired land. Briefly, the facts of the case are that vide notification dated 14.9.1983 issued under Section 4 of the Act, the State of Haryana acquired land situated in the revenue estate of village Khandsa, Tehsil and District Gurgaon, for development and utilisation thereof as residential-cum-commercial complex. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, “the Collector”) assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 45,000/- per acre for chahi, ` 35,000/- per acre for Magda, ` 16,000/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below determined the market value of the acquired land @ ` 19.20 per square yard. It is against this award that the landowners have filed the present set of appeals. Learned counsel for the appellants was fair enough to submit that the issue regarding determination of fair value of the land acquired vide notification dated 14.9.1983 has already been considered by this court in RFA No. 795 of 1990- Devi Singh (deceased) through Lrs Bishamber and others vs The Land Acquisition Collector and another, decided on 22.9.2008 whereby the RFA No. 2608 of 1989 -2- compensation for the acquisition in question was further enhanced to ` 33/- per square yard. However, he submitted that still considering the fact that for the land pertaining to adjoining villages, namely, Dundahera, Jharsa, and Carterpuri, the compensation has been assessed at a higher rate, by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Gokal vs State of Haryana AIR 1992 SC 150, by this court in RFA No. 2 of 1991 Azad Singh vs The State of Haryana and another, decided on 30.9.1997, and in Munshi vs Land Acquisition Collector, Urban Estates, Gurgaon 1992 (1) R. R. R. 1985, The landowners in present set of appeals be also awarded compensation considering the aforesaid judgments. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that once this court had already determined the compensation for the acquired land vide same notification, there is no question of relying upon judgments pertaining to the land of other villages. The landowners in the present set of appeals be also awarded compensation @ ` 33/- per square yards. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant referred record. Considering the fact that this court had already assessed the compensation for the land acquired vide same notification in Devi Singh's case (supra), @ ` 33/- per square yard, in my opinion, the landowners in the present set of appeals are also entitled to the same amount of compensation. They cannot be awarded compensation at a higher rate on the basis of the judgments relied upon by them which pertain to different villages. Accordingly, for the reasons mentioned above, the present appeals are disposed of in terms of Devi Singh's case (supra), and the landowners are held entitled to compensation @ ` 33/- per square yard. They shall also be entitled to all the statutory benefits available under the Act. 29.10.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge