RFA No. 1876 of 2006 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh RFA No. 1876 of 2006 (O&M) Date of decision : .9.2010 Narinder Kumar ... Appellant vs State of Haryana and others ..... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Vijay Pal, Advocate, for HAFED. Rajesh Bindal J. This order will dispose of appeals bearing RFA Nos. 1876, 2636 to 2641, 2903, 3527 to 3534 of 2006, as the same arise out of common acquisition. The land owners are in appeal 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 in compensation for the acquired land whereas the HAFED is seeking reduction thereof. Briefly, the facts of the case are that land measuring 117 kanals 19 marlas situated in the revenue estate of Tohana, District Fatehabad, was acquired by the State of Haryana vide notification dated 11.1.2001 issued under Section 4 of the Act for construction of Godowns and Rice Mills at Tohana. The same was followed by notification under Section 6 of the Act issued on 8.8.2002. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 2,75,000/- per acre for chahi, ` 1,75,000/- per acre for Tibba/Tall and ` 3,25,000/-per acre for gair mumkin kinds of land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the claimants filed objections, which were referred to learned Additional District Judge, Fatehabad. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below vide award dated 21.2.2006 assessed the compensation @ ` 8,00,000/- per acre for Category-A and ` 6,50,000/- per acre for category-B. It is this award which is impugned in the present set of appeals. Learned counsel for the landowners submitted that the acquired land is strategically located which the landowners have proved by producing on record the site plans, Ex. P-6 and Ex. P-28. The acquired land is located near the RFA No. 1876 of 2006 (2) industrial area. There are many commercial establishments located near the acquired like viz. FCI godown, CWC godown, HUDA Colony, Grain Market of Tohana, Mirch Mandi, Railway Station. The land is situated in the fast developing area of Tohana town and all the civic facilities are available there. The acquired land is situated on a State Highway close to industrial and residential area. The valuation of the land considering the same merely of agricultural kind is not fair as it had great future potential. Referring to the aforesaid strategic location of the land, learned counsel for the landowners submitted that the evidence produced on record by the landowners has not been considered. Referring to Ex. P-1 and Ex. P- 4, the submission was that even the State agencies in their correspondence had been mentioning the value of the acquired land at ` 7 lacs per acre. Further reliance was placed upon Ex. P-15, a conveyance deed registered on 8.1.2003 whereby 34,475 square meters of land was sold @ ` 150/- per square meter by the Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation to the Central Warehousing Corporation. The allotment letter thereof was issued on 4.9.2001 but the process for allotment started much prior. The aforesaid land is not that strategically located as is the land in the present case which is located at junction of five roads. Further reliance was also placed upon Ex. P-18, showing the allotment of commercial plot of 100 square yards by HUDA @ ` 1,193/- per square yard. It was further submitted that the belting system was not required to be adopted as the entire land was situated within the municipal limits and it had great future potential. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State pleaded no instructions as the land had been acquired for HAFED. A request made for adjournment on behalf of counsel for the HAFED was declined considering the fact the case is quite old and on the regular taken up list for quite some time. After hearing learned counsel for the landowner, I do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned award. The landowners have produced on record sale-deeds and various documents to show that compensation is not just and fair. However, in my opinion, the only document which could safely be relied upon is Ex. P-15, a conveyance deed registered for sale of land by HSIDC to the Central Warehousing Corporation whereby 34,475 square meters of land was sold @ ` 150/- per square meter. The allotment letter was issued on 4.9.2001 and the process for the sale must have been started much prior thereto. The notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 11.1.2001. The aforesaid land is located on a link road whereas the present land located on a crossing of five roads, certainly has better location and potentiality as compared to the aforesaid land of Central Warehousing Corporation. RFA No. 1876 of 2006 (3) Considering the aforesaid fact, the value of of the acquired land as assessed by the court below @ ` 8,00,000/- per acre for Category-A which is abutting the Highway and the rest of the land @ ` 6,50,000/- per acre cannot be faulted with. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed. .9.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge