Civil Revision No. 7886 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 7886 of 2011 Date of decision:- 20.12.2011 State of Haryana through its Collector, Gurgaon and others ...Petitioners Versus Satyawati and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present:- Mr. Ashish Kapoor, Addl. A.G. Haryana. RITU BAHRI J. Challenge is to the order dated 02.4.2011 whereby the petition under Section 151 CPC was filed by one of the joint owners, whose land has been acquired by the respondents vide notification dated 16.09.2002 and had sought that they should be given the enhanced compensation in terms of Award dated 06.5.2009 passed in Land Acquisition Case No.215 of 2005. This application was opposed on the ground that the petitioner had not filed any reference under Section 18 of the Act and the statutory period under Section 28-A of the Act had also expired. It was admitted that in a reference under Section 18 of the Act the compensation was enhanced to Rs.9,26,730/- per acre irrespective of the nature of the land. This application has been allowed in view of the judgment of this Court in Housing Civil Revision No. 7886 of 2011 -2- Board Haryana versus Bhag Singh 2008(1) RCR (Civil) 791. Counsel for the appellant has placed reliance of a Division Bench judgment passed by this Court in Jagir Kaur and others versus Government of India 2011(3) PLR 263 to contend that when a land owner has not filed a reference under Section 18 of the Act against the order passed by the Collector, he is not entitled to seek re-determination under Section 28-A of the Act after lapse of a period of 30 days. This judgment is not applicable to the facts of the present case. In the present case after the acquisition proceedings one of the co-sharer-Suresh Kumari had filed a reference under Section 18 of the Act, which was decided vide order dated 6.5.2009 in L.A. Case No.215 of 19.7.2005 and the compensation was enhanced to Rs.9,26,730/- per acre. The petitioners were joint owners with Suresh Kumari and could not file the reference as there was a dispute regarding aportionment of the compensation. Reference under Section 30 of the Act was filed, which was decided by the Court on 11.1.2010 in L.A. Case No.202 of 2005 titled as 'Ishar Singh versus Commandant IRB, Bhondsi'. The benefit of the award is available to all the co-sharers even if the reference under Section 18 of the Act had been made by only one of the co-sharers. This view was taken by the Division Bench of this Court in 1981 All India Land Laws Reporter 237 Punjab State (Now Haryana) v. M/s Globe Motors Ltd. and another. This view has also been followed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Civil Revision No. 7886 of 2011 -3- Housing Board Haryana versus Bhag Singh's case (supra), in paragraph 4 it is observed as under :- “4. In response thereto, the learned counsel for the respondent placed on file a photo copy of the order dated 01.12.1995 vide which a similar challenge filed by the Haryana Housing Board- appellant was declined in limine by this Court in Civil Revision No.4019 of 1995. Even otherwise, this Court categorically held in (Jangir Singh and another v. State of Punjab, 1991(1) RRR 316 : 1990 PLJ 515) that similarly circumstanced land owners must get the benefit of enhanced compensation even if they had not gone in for an appeal. Likewise, in 1981 All India Land Laws Reporter 237 (Punjab State (Now Haryana) v. M/s Globe Motors Ltd. and another), a Division Bench of this Court held that benefit of award can be claimed by all the co-sharers even if the reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act had been made by one of the co-sharers.” In Bhag Singh's case (supra) the enhanced compensation was given to co-sharers in an application filed under Section 151 CPC. Applying the ratio of the judgment, the present civil revision is devoid of any merits and is ordered to be dismissed. Ordered accordingly. December 20, 2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Vijay Asija JUDGE