R.F.A. No. 4911 of 2010 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.F.A. No. 4911 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 7.3.2011 Gopi Ram .... Appellant vs Haryana State and others .... Respondents Coram : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. S. K. Yadav and Mr. Amit Jain, Advocates, for the appellants. Mr. D. D. Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. RAJESH BINDAL, J The landowners have filed the appeals bearing RFA Nos. 4911, 4954 to 4959 of 2010, seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. Briefly the facts are that vide notification dated 1.9.1997 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') the State of Haryana acquired land in the revenue estates of villages Wazirabad and Haiderpur Viran, Tehsil and District Gurgaon, for development and utilisation thereof as Sector's road at Gurgaon. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 29.5.1998. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, 'the Collector') awarded compensation of acquired land @ ` 12,00,000/- per acre for chahi and ` 9,60,000/- per acre for magda/alabarani land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below while relying upon its earlier award dated 6.5.2008 determined the market value of the acquired land @ ` 717/- per square yard. Aggrieved against the award of learned Court below, the landowners are before this Court. R.F.A. No. 4911 of 2010 (2) Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the issues raised in the present appeal are squarely covered by judgment of this court in RFA No. 1824 of 2006 Sudama and others vs The State of Haryana and another, decided on 1.10.2010. A perusal of judgment in Sudama's case (supra), shows that this court determined the market value of the land acquired vide notification dated 8.9.1997 of villages Wazirabad and Chakarpur @ ` 1,520/- per square yard. In the present case, the land of villages Wazirabad and Haiderpur Viran was acquired vide notification dated 1.9.1997 in the same area. The learned court below had also assessed the compensation in the present case while relying upon its earlier award dated 6.5.2008 which was impugned in Sudama's case (supra). Learned State counsel did not dispute the aforesaid factual position. Accordingly, for the reasons recorded in Sudama's case (supra), the appeals are disposed of in the same terms. 7.3.2011 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge