RFA No. 1293 of 1991 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh RFA No. 1293 of 1991 (O&M) Date of decision : 23.8.2010. Punjab Wakf Board ..... Appellant vs State of Punjab and another ..... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. G. S. Bhatia, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Yatinder Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Rajesh Bindal J. The Punjab Wakf Board has filed the present appeal seeking further enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 11/13.3.1986 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), the State of Punjab acquired land situated in village Dainwind, Tehsil and District Kapurthala, for public purpose, namely, for the construction of 33 KV Sub-Station, Kartarpur Road, Kapurthala. The Land Acquisition Collector announced the award on 23.8.1986. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the objections were filed. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below dismissed the same as no evidence was produced before it to opine that the market value of the acquired land as assessed by the collector was not fair. It is this award which is impugned in the present appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the court below has wrongly dismissed the objections filed by it. The findings recorded by the court below that the reference is time barred are also liable to set aside. The evidence produced by the appellant in the form of sale-deeds, Ex. A5 and Ex. A6 was also not considered for assessing the compensation. The prayer was for enhancement of compensation. On the other hand, learned State counsel submitted that the court below has rightly dismissed the reference as time barred as it was filed beyond the limitation period. The award of the Collector was announced on 23.8.1986 whereas the application under Section 18 of the Act was filed on 18.12.1986 beyond six weeks period. As the appellant Board has not produced any convincing evidence, the court below has rightly upheld the award of the Collector. The prayer is for dismissal of appeal. RFA No. 1293 of 1991 (2) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant referred record. As far as the filing of application under Section 18 of the Act is concerned, it is admitted case of the parties that the same was filed on 18.12.1986 i.e. after expiry of six weeks period. The award of the Collector was announced on 23.8.1986. No evidence was led on behalf of the appellant Board in support of the claim that the reference was not time barred. As has been observed by the court below that Kishan Chand Kanungo of the appellant Board was present at the time of announcement of the award by the Collector on 23.8.1986. In the presence of such an evidence, the findings recorded by the court below are based on evidence and do not call any interference by this court on this issue. As regards determination of fair value of the acquired land, a perusal of the impugned award shows that the appellant has not produced any convincing evidence with regard to determination of fair market value of the acquired land. No evidence in the form of site plan was produced on record to show the location of the sale-deeds, Ex. A5 and A6, viz-a-vis the acquired land. In the absence of any material evidence on record, I find no reason to interfere with the impugned award, accordingly, the same is upheld and the appeal is dismissed. 23.8.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge