In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh RFA No. 1531 of 1994 (O&M) The State of Punjab and another ... Appellants vs Smt. Durga Devi ..... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Yatinder Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. C. B. Goel, Advocate, for the respondent. Rajesh Bindal J. The State of Punjab is in appeal before this Court against the award passed by learned court below for reduction in the amount of compensation awarded to the respondent on account of acquisition of land. Briefly, the facts are that State of Punjab vide notification dated 27.7.1984 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act') acquired land situated in the revenue estate of Village Chhat Bir, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala for construction of Link Road from Ambala- Chandigarh Road to Chhatbir. The Land Acquisition Collector announced his award on 8.1.1988 and awarded compensation @ ` 30,000/- per acre for chahi and ` 22,000/- per acre for barani and gair mumkin kinds of land. The landowners filed objections which were referred to the learned Court below for consideration, who keeping in view the material placed on record by the parties, determined the market value of the land at ` 57,200/- per acre for chahi and ` 45,000/- per acre for barani and gair mumkin kinds of land. It is this award which is impugned in the present appeal. A perusal of the paper-book shows that the court below had assessed the compensation on the basis of earlier award, Ex. A2, vide which the market value of the land acquired vide notification dated 2.5.1988 in the same village was assessed @ ` 1,00,000/- per acre. The court below while applying cut @ 12% per annum in reverse assessed the value in the present case. Keeping in view the fact that the amount involved in the present appeal is merely ` 10,200/- and the acquisition took place more than 26 years back, I do not find any reason to interfere therein at this stage. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed. 30.8.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge