IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA: RFA.No.197/2002. Date of Decision : 23rd April, 2008. Bala Ram. …Appellant. Versus: L.A.C. and another. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for judgment?1 For the appellant: Mr.Sunil Goel, Advocate. . For Respondent. Mr.Vivek Thakur, Addl. Advocate General with Ms. Subh Mahajan, Deputy Advocate General. Sanjay Karol, J(Oral). The present appeal arises out of the award dated 3rd August, 2002 passed by District Judge, Kullu in Reference Petition No. 23/2001 titled as Bala Ram Vs. Collector, Land Acquisition and another. The claimant’s land was acquired vide Notification dated 8th January, 1980 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and Collector’s Award No.46 dated 7th March, 1986. For the purpose of awarding additional compensation, a supplementary Award No.10 of 1997 dated 15th November, 1997 was passed by the Collector awarding a sum of Rs. 43,100/- as compensation for the acquisition of the house on the acquired land. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Aggrieved by the same, the claimant preferred a Reference Petition under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the District Judge in terms of award dated 3rd August, 2002 enhanced the compensation amount to Rs.4,497/-.The same is subject matter of the present appeal, filed by the claimant. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. It is evident that the report of the expert Ext. RW-2/A to RW-2/G, filed by the State was not proved in accordance with law inasmuch as the author of the said report did not step into the witness box to prove the same. The relevance and the effect thereof have not been considered by the court below. The claimant had also filed report of the expert (Ext. PW-2/J to Ext.PW-2/L) assessing the value of the acquired house. There is no finding as to why the said report could not be looked into and accepted and made basis for awarding compensation. Learned counsels appearing for the parties are of the view that the matter be remanded back to the court below for consideration afresh. In this view of the matter the award dated 3rd August, 2002 is set aside and the Reference Petition is restored to its original position. The matter is remanded back to the court below for consideration afresh. It will be open for the parties to lead additional evidence, if any. It is, however, clarified that the matter being very old, the parties shall not take un-necessary adjournment and the petition be disposed of as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of four months from the date of the first hearing. 3 The learned counsels for the parties jointly agree to cause appearance before the concerned Court on 23rd May, 2008. The record along with a copy of this order be immediately sent back to the concerned Court. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. April 23, 2008(R)