In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh RFA No. 992 of 1991 (O&M) Parbhati Ram ..... Appellant vs The State of Punjab and another .... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Pritam Saini, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Yatinder Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Rajesh Bindal J. The landowner has filed appeal seeking enhancement of severance charges, change of kind of land and on account of loss of access for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts are that the land situated in village Manakpur, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala was acquired by the State Government vide notification dated 20.8.1985 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act') for construction of SYL Canal. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') assessed the compensation vide his award dated 13.7.1987. Aggrieved against the award of the Collector, the land owners filed objections which were referred to the learned Additional District Judge, Patiala, who awarded 10% as severance charges, 25% on account of change of kind of land from chahi to barani and 50% on account of loss of access. It is this award of the learned Reference Court which is impugned in the present appeal. A perusal of the impugned award shows that the court below had assessed the compensation while taking guidance from earlier judgment of this court and not by applying thumb rule only. Learned counsel for the appellant could not cite any other authority to justify his claim for further enhancement. The State is not in appeal. In view of the above, no case for enhancement of compensation is made out. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 17.8.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge