RFA No.900 of 1991 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA No.900 of 1991 Date of Decision: 1.7.2010 Mohinder Kumar ..Appellant. Vs. State of Haryana ..Respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.C.B.Goel, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.Anjum Ahmed, Addl.AG Haryana for the respondent. RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. Vide notification dated 12/19.8.1983 and 29.3.1985 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short `the Act') followed by notification dated 29.3.1985 and 24.7.1985 issued under Section 6 of the Act, land measuring 6477 kanals 11 marlas and 179 kanals 8 marlas, total measuring 6656 kanals 19 marlas including the land of the appellant situated in village Bohli, Tehsil Panipat, District Karnal was acquired at the public expense, for public purpose, namely for the installation of Refinery in village Bohli, Tehsil Panipat, District Karnal. The Land Acquisition Collector, vide his award dated 26.3.1987, assessed the market value of the land at the following rates: 1) Chahi/Nehri land Rs.20,000/- per acre 2) Barani Rs.10,000/- per acre RFA No.900 of 1991 -2- 3) Banjar Rs.5,000/- per acre The claimants filed Objections against the award of the Collector wherein they claimed market value of the acquired land between Rs.1.5 lacs to Rs.2 lacs per acre. The said claim was contested by the State of Haryana in which it was alleged that the Collector has considered all aspects before passing the award, therefore, it does not call for any interference. After considering both oral as well as documentary evidence, the learned Reference Court vide its award dated 3.12.1990 upheld the award of the Collector on the basis of award Ex.R9 dated 1.9.1988 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Karnal. The learned Court below observed that 16 references had arisen out of the award dated 26.3.1987 passed by the Collector which have been disposed of vide award Ex.R9 in which the learned Court had considered all the sale instances, namely, Ex.P3 to Ex.P5 and Ex.R2 to Ex.R8. Sh.C.B.Goel, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant argued that the order of the Reference Court is liable to be notified for the purpose of enhancement of compensation yet he could not point out any non-appreciation of evidence rather the order of Sh.R.C.Kathuria, the then Additional District Judge, Karnal is very exhaustive in which he has taken into consideration the entire evidence on record i.e. the sale deeds which have been relied upon in the present case. In this background, I do not find any error in the order of learned Reference Court in relying upon the earlier award Ex.R9 and as such, there is no scope for enhancement of compensation in the present case and hence, the present appeal being devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed RFA No.900 of 1991 -3- but without any order as to costs. (Rakesh Kumar Jain) 1.7.2010 Judge Meenu