In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh R. F. A No. 2205 of 1993 (O&M) Mangat Ram and others ... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector, Urban Estate Haryana, Gurgaon .... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: None for the landowners. Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal J. The landowners have approached this court for enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 10.1.1983, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), the State of Haryana acquired land situated within the revenue estate of Village Jharsa, Tehsil and District Gurgaon, for public purpose namely for the development and utilisation thereof as residential and commercial area at Gurgaon. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, “the Collector”) vide his award dated 21.9.1986 assessed the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 60,000/- per acre for chahi, Rs. 50,000/- per acre for magda and Rs. 40,000/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Land Acquisition Collector, the landowner/claimant filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below vide award dated 18.2.1993, determined the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 136/- per square yard for the land falling upto 10 yards deep on both sides of National Highway No. 8 and Rs. 68/- per square yard for the remaining land beyond the said depth of 10 yards from National Highway No. 8. Learned Additional Advocate General submitted that the issue involved in the present appeals is squarely covered by judgment of this court in R. F. A. No. 2868 of 1992 – Balai Ram and others vs State of Haryana and another, decided on 19.11.2008. As the landowners have already been granted compensation for the acquired land which is in conformity with the judgment of this court in Balai Ram's case (supra), I do not find any merit in the present appeal. However, as the learned counsel for the appellants is not present, the appeal is dismissed for non- prosecution. 10.12.2008 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge