In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh RFA No. 792 of 1998 (O&M) Kaur Singh and others ... Appellants vs State of Haryana .... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate, for the appellants. Ms. Palika Monga, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal J. This appeal has been filed by the landowner seeking further enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts are that land situated in village Rori, Tehsil and District Sirsa, was acquired vide notification dated 29.3.1993 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act') for the purpose of construction of Rori-Ghaggar Drain. The Land Acquisition Collector gave award of Rs. 30,000/- per acre. Aggrieved against the same, the land owners filed objections which were referred to the learned Additional District Judge, Sirsa, who keeping in view the material placed on record by the parties, assessed the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 1,00,000/- per acre. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the issue involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgment of this court in RFA No. 394 of 1998– Ajmer Singh and others vs State of Haryana decided on 18.4.2009. Learned State counsel does not dispute this factual position, however, it was submitted that the appellants in the present case are not entitled to any damages on account of severance charges as no such issue was there in the present appeal. Learned counsel for the appellants was fair enough to admit that there was no claim of severance in the case of the appellants. For the reasons recorded in Smt. Poonam's case, the present appeal is disposed of in terms thereof only to the extent of the value of the land, however, the appellants shall not be entitled to any amount on account of severance charges. 29.5.2009 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge In RFA No. 792 of 1998 The aforesaid appeal was disposed of on 29.5.2009 in terms of judgment rendered in RFA No. 394 of 1998 Ajmer Singh and others vs State of Haryana, decided on 18.4.2009. The file was put up again by the Registry pointing out that in last paragraph of the order dated 29.5.2009 inadvertently party name has been mentioned as “Smt. Poonam's instead of Ajmer Singh's. The record has been perused. The error pointed out by the Registry has been corrected under my signatures. The order passed today shall form part of the order passed on 29.5.2009. 8.9.2009 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge