RFA No.1399 of 1989 1 IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH RFA No. 1399 of 1989 (O&M) Date of Decision: 28.03.2011 The Union of India and others ...Appellants Versus Jaimal Singh and others ..Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mrs. K.K. Kahlon, Advocate for the appellants. …. RAJESH BINDAL, J. This order will dispose of RFA Nos.1399, 1401, 1402, 1404, 1405, 1407, 1408, 2282, 2284 and 2286 of1989, as common question of law and facts are involved. Challenge in the present appeals is to the order passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur. Union of India has filed ap- peals seeking reduction of compensation for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts of the case are that Union of India vide notification dated 17.11.1979, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisi- tion Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), sought to acquire land situated in reve- nue estate of village Bungal, H.B. No.390, Tehsil Pathankot, District Gur- daspur for use of defence purpose. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short “the Collector”) assessed the value for the acquired land vide his award dated 19.09.1985 as under:- 1. Barani I ` 6,200/- per acre 2. Barani II ` 5,000/- per acre 3. Barani III ` 4,000/- per acre 4. Banjar Jadid ` 3,000/- per acre 5. Banjar Qadim ` 3,000/- per acre 6. Gair Mumkin ` 2,000/- per acre 7. Gair Mumkin ` 6,200/- per acre (abadi) The landowners feeling dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, filed reference under Section 18 of the Act. The learned court below determined the market value of the acquired land @ ` 21,000/- per acre. Dissatisfied with the award of the court below, the Union of India has RFA No.1399 of 1989 2 filed appeals challenging the aforesaid award. Learned counsel for the Union of India fairly submitted that the other appeals filed by the Union of India arising out of the same acquisition involving the same issue have already been dismissed by this court referring to the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Dilawar Singh and others vs Union of India and others JT 2010 (11) SC 556. For the reasons mentioned above, the present appeals are dismissed. (RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE 28.03.2011 sharmila