In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh RFA No. 2311 of 1993 (O&M) Atma Singh and another ..... Appellants vs The State of Punjab ..... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: None for the appellants. Mr. Yatinder Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Rajesh Bindal J. The landowners have filed the present appeal seeking further enhancement of compensation for the tubewell existing on the acquired land. Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 4.2.1982 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), the State of Punjab acquired land along with superstructure situated within the revenue estate of village Kamalpur, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala for construction of SYL Canal. The learned court below dismissed the reference filed under Section 18 of the Act vide award dated 1.10.1992. It is this award which is impugned in the present appeal. No one has appeared for the appellants at the time of hearing. A perusal of the impugned award shows that the appellants have themselves admitted that they have received the compensation for the acquisition of tubewell on 23.12.1985. At that time they had not lodged any protest. They did not even produce any evidence to establish that the tubewell in question was installed in the year 1977-78. As there is no evidence available on record, prima facie, no case for interference is made out. However, as no one has appeared for the appellants, the present appeal is dismissed in default. 25.8.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge