R. F. A No. 3952 of 2008 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Date of decision : 20.11.2008 1. R. F. A No. 3952 of 2008 and Cross-objection No. 66/C-I of 2008 (O&M) The Haryana State and another ..... Appellants vs Shiv Kumar and others ... Respondents 2. R. F. A No. 327 of 1998 (O&M) The State of Haryana ..... Appellant vs Sohan Pal and others ... Respondents 3. R. F. A No. 506 of 2000 (O&M) State of Haryana and another ..... Appellants vs Sohan Lal and others ... Respondents 4. R. F. A No. 790 of 2000 and Cross-objection No. 42/C-I of 2001 (O&M) State of Haryana ..... Appellant vs Nafis Ahmad and another ... Respondents 5. R. F. A No. 1279 of 2000 (O&M) State of Haryana and another ..... Appellants vs Gajay Singh ... Respondent 6. R. F. A No. 2258 of 2000 and Cross-objection No. 143/C-I of 2001 (O&M) The State of Haryana ..... Appellant vs Gian Chand and another ... Respondents 7. R. F. A No. 3573 of 2003 (O&M) State of Haryana ..... Appellant vs Balwanta and others ... Respondents R. F. A No. 3952 of 2008 (2) 8. R. F. A No. 3574 of 2003 (O&M) State of Haryana ..... Appellant vs Ranbir Kumar Gupta ... Respondent 9. R. F. A No. 3575 of 2003 and Cross-objection No. 91/C-I of 2004 (O&M) The State of Haryana and another ..... Appellants vs Mrs. Maya and others ... Respondents 10. R. F. A No. 3576 of 2003 (O&M) State of Haryana ..... Appellant vs Krishan Kumar ... Respondent 11. R. F. A No. 3577 of 2003 and Cross-objection No. 92/C-I of 2004 (O&M) State of Haryana and another ..... Appellants vs Tej Singh and another ... Respondents 12. R. F. A No. 1985 of 2006 (O&M) State of Haryana ..... Appellant vs Kamla Rani and others ... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Amit Jain, Advocate, for the landowners in R. F. A. Nos. 327 of 1998 and 3952 of 2008. Mr. Navneet Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, for the State. Rajesh Bindal J. This order shall dispose of Regular First Appeal Nos. 327 of 1998, 506, 790, 1279 and 2258 of 2000, 3573 to 3577 of 2003 and 1985 of 2006 filed by the State of Haryana, and Cross-objection Nos. 42/C-I, 143/C-I of 2001, 91/C-I, 92/C-I of 2004, and 66/CI of 2008 filed by the landowners, as the same arise out of a common acquisition. The claimants/landowners have approached this court by filing cross-objections for further enhancement, whereas the State of Haryana has R. F. A No. 3952 of 2008 (3) filed appeals for reduction in the compensation. The facts have been noticed from R. F. A. No. 3952 of 2008. Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 26.12.1988, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), the State of Haryana acquired land measuring 3930 kanals 7 marlas in the revenue estate of Village Jharsetli, for the development and utilisation of the land as Industrial area in Sector-58 at Faridabad. The Land Acquisition Collector assessed the market value of the land at Rs. 2,40,000/- per acre for chahi, nehri, magda, banjar quadim and gair mumkin kind of land and Rs. 1,50,000/- per acre for gair mumkin talab. Dissatisfied with the award of the Land Acquisition Collector, the landowners/claimants filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below vide award dated 6.11.2007, determined the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 330/- per square yard. Learned Assistant Advocate General conceded that the issue involved in the present set of appeals is squarely covered by the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 4819 of 2008 Rama Nand vs State of Haryana, decided on 4.8.2008, whereby the cases have been remanded back to the Reference court for fresh consideration. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the impugned award of the learned court below is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Reference Court for fresh consideration on the basis of the evidence already led by the parties. The parties through their counsels are directed to appear before the learned District Judge, Faridabad, on 20.12.2008. The learned District Judge may either keep the references with himself or may entrust the same to any other Additional District Judge who is dealing with the cases referred back by Hon'ble the Supreme Court. Considering the fact that the acquisition in the present cases is about 20 years old, it would be appreciated if the learned court below decides the references at an early date. The appeals/cross-objection are disposed of in the manner indicated above. 20.11.2008 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge