In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh R. F. A No. 313 of 1988 (O&M) Date of decision : 25.9.2008 Thambu ..... Appellant vs The State of Haryana and another ..... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Harish Nain, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Deepak Girotra, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal J. The landowner is 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 of compensation for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the State of Haryana vide notification dated 22.5.1984 issued under Section 4 of the Act, acquired the land situated in revenue estate of Village Titoli, Tehsil and District Rohtak, for public purpose namely for the construction of remodelling of Drain No. 8. The Land Acquisition Collector vide his award dated 22.4.1985 assessed the market value of the land @ Rs. 18,000/- per acre for nehri/chahi, and Rs. 8,000/- per acre for banjar/gair mumkin kind of land. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below vide award dated 1.2.1988, determined the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 25,000/- per acre for nehri/chahi and Rs. 18,000/- per acre for barani/gair mumkin kind of land. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the claim made by the appellant/landowner in the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgment of this court in R.F.A. No. 60 of 1987 – Piare and another vs State of Haryana and another, decided on 5.4.1989, whereby the compensation payable to the landowners for acquisition of land was further enhanced to Rs. 48,000/- per acre. Learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, appearing for the State did not dispute the fact that the claim made by the appellant/landowner in the present case is squarely covered by the judgment of this court in Piare's case (supra). For the detailed reasons recorded in Piare's case (supra), the appeal is allowed in the same terms. 25.9.2008 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge