RFA No.1248 of 1991 1 IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH RFA No. 1248 of 1991 (O&M) and Cross Objections No. 100-CI of 2004 Date of Decision: 19.12.2011 State of Haryana ...Appellant Versus Chander Haush and others .....Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Ashok Jindal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Rajiv Shrama, Advocate for the landowners. ..... RAJESH BINDAL, J. The State is in appeal seeking reduction in the amount of compensation awarded by the learned court below to the land owners, whereas by filing cross-objections, the landowners are seeking enhancement thereof. Brief facts of the case are that land situated in the revenue estate of village Salwan, Hadbast No. 95, Tehsil Assandh, District Karnal was sought to be acquired by the State of Haryana for the purpose for construction of a Warehouse in village Salwan vide notification, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”), on 13/14.05.1985. The same was followed by notification dated 20.03.1986, issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short “the Collector”) vide his award dated 27.01.1987 assessed the market value of the land @ ` 30,000/- per acre. 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 @ ` 16.50 per sq. yard. RFA No.1248 of 1991 2 Learned counsel for the landowners raised a solitary argument stating that the land in question is located on Assandh-Panipat Road. It is forming part of Khasra Nos. 216/2 and 248/2. It has come on record that Petrol Pump was already existed in Khasra No. 248/1. The land in question was acquired for the purpose for construction of a Warehouse in village Salwan. The landowners in the present case had relied upon a sale deed pertaining to portion of land of Khasra No. 248/1 and 248/2, which was registered on 19.9.1984 (Ex.P-1), vide which four kanals of land was sold for ` 40,000/- i.e. ` 80,000/- per acre. The submission is that notification under Section 4 in the present case was issued on 13/14.5.1985 and there being a gap of nine months between the registration of sale deed and the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act, the landowners should be granted a reasonable increase for this period, considering the fact that the land was having a great future potential. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that the landowners in the present case have already been granted sufficient compensation in terms of the sale deed produced by them on record. There being no material to show that prices of land increased during the interregnum, the landowners are not entitled to any increase for the same. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that sale deed (Ex.P-1) on record was registered on 19.9.1984. It pertained to Khasra Nos.248/1 and 248/2, whereby four kanals of land was sold at an average price of ` 80,000/- per acre. The acquired land is also partly pertaining to Khasra No.248/2 and located on Assandh-Panipat Road adjoining an existing Petrol Pump. Considering the gap of nine months between the registration of sale deed and the notification under Section 4 of the Act, in my opinion, the landowners in the present case are entitled to increase of at least @ 10% on the amount of sale consideration shown in the sale deed (Ex.P-1). In view of my aforesaid discussions, value of the acquired land is assessed @ ` 88,000/- per acre. The landowners shall also be entitled to all statutory benefits on the enhanced compensation. The appeal and the cross-objections are disposed of. RFA No.1248 of 1991 3 (RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE 19.12.2011 sharmila