R.F.A. No. 773 of 2000 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.F.A. No. 773 of 2000 (O&M) Date of Decision: 6.1.2011 Harjinder Singh .... Appellant vs The State of Haryana and another .... Respondents Coram : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present:- Mr. Ashish Bansal, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. RAJESH BINDAL, J This order will dispose of the RFA Nos. 773 to 775 of 2000, as the same arise out of common acquisition. The landowners are in appeal before this court against the award of the learned court below seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land owned by them. Briefly, the facts are that State of Haryana vide notification dated 2.7.1985 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act') acquired land situated in the revenue estate of village Kharak Mangoli, Hadbast No. 388, Tehsil Kalka, District Ambala, for development and utilization thereof as residential and commercial area under the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977. The Land Acquisition Collector assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 75,000/- per acre for abpash, ` 50,000/- per acre for barani, ` 25,000/- per acre for banjar and ` 14,375/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections which were referred to the learned Court below, who dismissed the same vide award dated 20.11.1999. It is this award which is impugned in the present set of appeals. Learned counsel for the appellants-landowners submitted that the appellants in the present case are registered owners of the land in question, however, still their claim for compensation has been rejected. They have not been paid any compensation before the learned court below. Inadvertently no documentary evidence could be led by the landowners in the form of sale-deeds registered in their favour to show that the land in fact had been purchased by the appellants and they were the owner thereof before the issuance of notification R.F.A. No. 773 of 2000 -2- under Section 4 of the Act. He further submitted that before this court, the appellants filed Civil Misc. No. 1462/CI of 2000 seeking permission to produce on record copies of two sale-deeds dated 28.12.1982, one sale-deed dated 17.10.1983 and also copies of mutations, which clearly establish that the land in question was owned by the appellants. Once the acquired land is in the ownership of the landowners, they are entitled to get compensation on account of acquisition thereof. He further submitted that value of the land acquired vide same notification has already been determined by this court vide judgment dated 29.10.2009 in RFA No. 41 of 1997 Smt. Parkash Rani vs The State of Haryana. In the aforesaid judgment, the compensation has been determined @ ` 250/- per square yard. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that the factum regarding ownership of the land in the sale-deeds in question as has been annexed by the applicants-appellants along with the application has been verified from the record and it has been found that the sale-deeds mentioned above are genuine and the mutation was also entered. He further did not dispute the fact that in Smt. Parkash Rani's case (supra), this court had determined the value of the land acquired vide same notification. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant referred record. The sale-deeds and the mutation, the correctness of which has been verified by learned counsel for the State clearly establish the ownership of the land owners to the extent mentioned in the aforesaid sale-deeds. Once the portion of the acquired land is registered in the name of the appellants, they are certainly entitled to get compensation on account of acquisition thereof. The value of the land acquired vide same notification has already been determined in Smt. Parkash Rani's case (supra). Following the same in the present case, the landowners are also held entitled to same amount of compensation as determined by this court in the aforesaid case. The appeals are disposed of accordingly. 6.1.2011. (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge