R. F. A No. 43 of 1986 1 In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh R. F. A No. 43 of 1986 (O&M) Date of decision : 3.9.2008 Harash Bala Jain and another ..... Appellants vs Haryana State and another ..... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. R. P. S. Ahluwalia, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. H. S. Hooda, Advocate General, Haryana with Mr. Rajiv Kawatra, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal J. The claimants are in appeal before this court against the award of learned Additional District Judge, Ambala where on account of acquisition of land vide notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), dated 17.7.1982, owned by the appellants/claimants, a sum of Rs. 40,000/- per acre for chahi, Rs. 30,000/- per acre for barani, Rs. 20,000/- per acre for banjar and Rs. 10,000/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land, has been awarded as compensation. Briefly, the facts are that vide Notification dated 17.7.1982, issued under Section 4 of the Act, an area of 8.065 acres situated in Village Kakru, Tehsil and District Ambala, was acquired for a public purpose namely for the construction of Panjokhra minor. The award was announced by the Collector on 28.10.1982, granting compensation @ of Rs. 15,000/- per acre for chahi, Rs. 10,000/- per acre for barani, Rs. 5,000/- per acre for banjar and Rs. 2,500/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land. The learned Additional District Judge vide judgment dated 3.1.1985, determined the compensation @ of Rs. 40,000/- per acre for chahi, Rs. 30,000/- per acre for barani, Rs. 20,000/- per acre for banjar and Rs. 10,000/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land. Learned Advocate General very fairly submitted that the claim made by the appellants in the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgments of this court in R.F.A. No. 2141 of 1984 - State of Haryana vs R. F. A No. 43 of 1986 2 Smt. Bachan Kaur, decided on 8.5.1986 and R. F. A. No. 253 of 1985 – Joginder Singh vs State of Haryana decided on 2.2.1987. For the detailed reasons stated in Smt. Bachan Kaur and Joginder Singh s' cases (supra), the present appeal is allowed in the same terms. 3.9.2008 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge