RFA No. 1633 of 1995 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh RFA No. 1633 of 1995 (O&M) Date of decision : 23.3.2011 The State of Haryana ... Appellant vs Ajaib Singh and others .... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. A. S. Virk, Advocate, for the landowners. Rajesh Bindal J. The State of Hayana has filed the present appeal seeking reduction of compensation awarded to the landowners for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts are that the State of Haryana vide notification dated 19.9.1983 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') sought to acquire land situated within the revenue estate of Village Fatehpur, Hadbast No. 367, Tehsil Kalka, District Ambala, for development and utilisation thereof as residential and commercial purpose in the Urban Estate of Kalka. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, 'the Collector') vide his award dated 17.9.1986 assessed the market value of the land @ ` 76,500/- per acre for chahi land, ` 45,000/- per acre for barani, ` 22,500/- per acre for banjar and ` 12,250/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below, determined the market value of the acquired land @ ` 2,25,000/- per acre. It is this award which is impugned by the State in the present appeal. Learned counsel for the landowners submitted that the issue raised in the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgment of this court in RFA No. 2358 of 1993 – Ashok Kumar and another vs The State of Haryana, decided on 30.10.2008, whereby the amount of compensation payable to the landowners for the land acquired vide same notification was further enhanced to ` 2,40,000/- per acre. RFA No. 1633 of 1995 (2) Learned State counsel did not dispute the aforesaid factual position. Since this court had further enhanced the compensation payable to the landowners for the acquired land, the appeal filed by the State for reduction does not survive. Accordingly, for the reasons mentioned in Ashok Kumar' s case (supra), the present appeal is dismissed. 23.3.2011 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge