RFA No. 1287 of 2009 1 IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH RFA No. 1287 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.12.2011 Union Territory, Chandigarh ...Appellant Versus Gian Chand .....Respondent CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Sanjay Kaushal, Senior Standing Counsel for Union Territory, Chandigarh. Mr. P.C. Dhiman, Advocate for the landowner(s) in RFA No. 5395, 5425 of 2010. ..... RAJESH BINDAL, J. This order will dispose of RFA Nos. 1287 to 1294 of 2009, 5395, 5425 of 2010 as common questions of law and facts are involved. Union Territory is in appeal seeking reduction of the amount of compensation awarded by the learned court below for the super structure existing on the acquired land, whereas by filing appeals, the landowners are seeking enhancement thereof. Brief facts of the case are that vide notification dated 2.3.2001, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (for short “the Act”), land situated in the revenue estate of villages Jhumru and Burail, Union Territory, Chandigarh was sought to be acquired by Union Territory, Chandigarh. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short “the Collector”) vide award dated 28.02.2002 assessed the market value of the super structure existing on the acquired land. The landowner(s) feeling dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, filed reference under Section 18 of the Act. The RFA No. 1287 of 2009 2 learned court below granted increase @ 25% over and above the value as assessed by the officials of the PWD Department. Learned counsel for the parties submitted that the claim made in the present set of appeals is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in RFA No. 579 of 2006, titled as Smt. Akko Devi and others Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh and another, decided on 1.10.2008, whereby award of compensation @ 25% over and above the value assessed at PWD rates was upheld. The learned court below has already awarded compensation which is in terms of the aforesaid judgment. Accordingly, for the reasons recorded in Smt. Akko Devi’ case (supra), the appeals are dismissed. (RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE 23.12.2011 sharmila