R. F. A No. 679 of 2001 -1- In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Date of decision : 4.3.2010 1. R. F. A No. 679 of 2001 (O&M) Bhagwant Singh ..... Appellant vs Union Territory, Chandigarh ..... Respondent 2. R. F. A No. 2020 of 2001 (O&M) Mehar Kaur and others ..... Appellants vs Union Territory, Chandigarh ..... Respondent 3. R. F. A No. 2021 of 2001 (O&M) Angrej Singh and others ..... Appellants vs Union Territory, Chandigarh ..... Respondent 4. R. F. A No. 3965 of 2001 (O&M) Tehal Singh ..... Appellant vs Union Territory, Chandigarh ..... Respondent 5. R. F. A No. 4183 of 2001 (O&M) Manmohan Singh ..... Appellant vs Union Territory, Chandigarh ..... Respondent 6. R. F. A No. 2677 of 2002 (O&M) Raunqi ..... Appellant vs Union Territory, Chandigarh ..... Respondent 7. R. F. A No. 3290 of 2002 (O&M) Ajmer Singh ..... Appellant vs Union Territory, Chandigarh ..... Respondent 8. R. F. A No. 4072 of 2002 (O&M) Bhag Singh ..... Appellant vs Union Territory, Chandigarh ..... Respondent R. F. A No. 679 of 2001 -2- 9. R. F. A No. 2551 of 2003 (O&M) Union Territory, Chandigarh ..... Appellant vs Dilbagh Singh ..... Respondent 10. R. F. A No. 2552 of 2003 (O&M) Union Territory, Chandigarh ..... Appellant vs Gurdev Singh ..... Respondent 11. R. F. A No. 1680 of 2004 (O&M) Union Territory, Chandigarh ..... Appellant vs Parkash Singh ..... Respondent 12. R. F. A No. 1681 of 2004 (O&M) Union Territory, Chandigarh ..... Appellant vs Smt. Kako ..... Respondent 13. R. F. A No. 2785 of 2005 (O&M) Dilbag Singh ..... Appellant vs Union Territory, Chandigarh ..... Respondent 14. R. F. A No. 3959 of 2007 (O&M) Union Territory, Chandigarh ..... Appellant vs Tarsem Lal ..... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. P. C. Dhiman and Mr. R. K. Dhiman, Advocates, for the landowners. Mrs. Lisa Gill and Mr. Vishal Sodh, Advocates, for Union Territory, Chandigarh. Rajesh Bindal J. This order shall dispose of the aforesaid appeals, as the same arise out of common acquisition. The Union Territory is in appeal before this court against the award of the learned court below seeking reduction in the compensation awarded for the acquired land whereas landowners are seeking further enhancement. R. F. A No. 679 of 2001 -3- The facts have been extracted from RFA. No. 679 of 2001. Briefly, the facts are that the land in Village Palsora (Chandigarh) was acquired vide notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on 8.7.1994, for the development of third phase of Chandigarh. The Land Acquisition Collector assessed the compensation @ Rs. 3,38,100/- per acre. Aggrieved against the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections which were referred to the learned Reference Court, who keeping in view the material placed on record by the parties, determined the value of the acquired land @ Rs. 5,50,000/- per acre. It is this award which is impugned in the present set of appeals. Learned counsel for the landowners submitted that the claim of the landowners in the present set of appeals is squarely covered by the judgment of this court in R. F. A. No. 1095 of 2000 Ronki vs Union Territory, Chandigarh , decided on 18.5.2009, whereby value of the acquired land was further enhanced to Rs. 12,54,880/- per acre. Learned counsel appearing for Union Territory did not dispute this factual position. Accordingly, for the reasons recorded in Ronki's case (supra), the appeals filed by Union Territory, Chandigarh are dismissed and that of the landowners are allowed in the same terms. 4.3.2010 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge