IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA No. 1779 of 1997 (O&M) Gurmail Singh and others … Appellants vs Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondents Present : Mr. P. C. Dhiman, Mr. Nitin Sarin, Advocates, for the landowners. None for Union Territory, Chandigarh. Rajesh Bindal, J. This order will dispose of appeals, filed by the landowners for enhancement of compensation for the acquired land, bearing RFA Nos. 1779, 1816, 2110 of 1997 and 701 of 1998, as the same arise out of common acquisition. Briefly the facts of the case are that Union Territory, Chandigarh, vide notification dated 13.10.1989 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “the Act”), acquired land situated within the revenue estate of village Hallo Majra, Union Territory, Chandigarh, for construction of Indo-Tibet Border Police (Camp). The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, 'the Collector’) assessed the fair market value of the acquired land @ ` 1,65,400/- per acre. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below vide impugned award assessed the compensation for the acquired land @ ` 2,47,160/- per acre. Still dissatisfied, the landowners have challenged the award of the learned court below before this court. Learned counsel for the landowners submitted that the claim made in the present set of appeals is squarely covered by judgment of this court in RFA No. 350 of 1996 -Kulwant Singh etc. vs Union Territory, Chandigarh decided on 12.1.2001, whereby compensation payable to the landowners for the acquired land vide same notification for the same very purpose was determined @ ` 4,50,000/- per acre. No one has appeared for Union Territory, Chandigarh. A perusal of the aforesaid judgment shows that the issue under consideration in the aforesaid judgment was determination of compensation for the land acquired vide same notification. For the reasons recorded in the aforesaid judgment, the appeals are disposed of in the same terms. 12.1.2011 (Rajesh Bindal) vs Judge