R. F. A No. 2434 of 1992 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Date of decision : 3.12.2008 1. R. F. A No. 2434 of 1992 (O&M) The State of Punjab and another ..... Appellants vs Nek Singh and others ..... Respondents 2. R. F. A No. 2435 of 1992 (O&M) The State of Punjab and another ..... Appellants vs Bhajan Singh ..... Respondent 3. R. F. A No. 2436 of 1992 (O&M) Land Acquisition Collector, SYL Canal Project, Patiala and another ..... Appellants vs Raghbir Singh and others ..... Respondents 4. R. F. A No. 2437 of 1992 (O&M) Land Acquisition Collector, SYL Canal Project, Patiala and another ..... Appellants vs Sital Singh and others ..... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Vivek Chauhan, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Rajesh Bindal J. This order shall dispose of Regular First Appeal nos. 2434 to 2437 of 1992 filed by the State of Punjab against a common award of the learned court below for reduction in compensation awarded to the landowners/ respondents. However, the facts have been extracted from R. F. A. No. 2434 of 1992. Briefly, the facts are that the State of Punjab acquired the land within the revenue estate of Village Kotli, Tehsil and District Ropar, vide notification dated 25.9.1985, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition R. F. A No. 2434 of 1992 (2) Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), for construction of Sutlej Yamuna Link Canal. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, “the Collector”) vide his award dated 20.6.1986 assessed the market value of the land at the following rates:- Chahi Rs. 72,500/- per acre Barani Rs. 50,000/- per acre Banjar Kadim Rs. 45,000/- per acre Gair Mumkin Rs. 40,000/- 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 award dated 3.5.1991, determined the compensation at the following rates:- Chahi Rs. 80,000/- per acre Barani Rs. 60,000/- per acre Banjar Kadim Rs. 55,000/- per acre Gair Mumkin Rs. 45,000/- per acre It is against this award the State has filed the present set of appeals. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the learned court below has assessed the value of the acquired land merely applying a thumb rule on the basis of oral evidence as there is no documentary evidence to substantiate the plea that value of the acquired land was more than what was granted by the Collector. Having heard learned counsel for the appellants, I do not find any merit in the submissions made. The land in question was acquired vide notification dated 25.9.1985 and the value of the acquired land was assessed by the Collector, as referred to in preceding para. Keeping in view the oral evidence of the parties, the learned court below made a marginal increase in the value of the acquired land of different categories in the following terms:- Chahi Rs. 80,000/- per acre Barani Rs. 60,000/- per acre Banjar Kadim Rs. 55,000/- per acre Gair Mumkin Rs. 45,000/- per acre R. F. A No. 2434 of 1992 (3) Keeping in view the fact that the acquisition was made 23 years back and the increase is very small, even applicability of thumb rule for estimation of the value of the acquired land cannot be interfered with at this stage. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed. 3.12.2008 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge