R.F.A. No. 1399 of 1992 1 In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh R.F.A. No. 1399 of 1992 (O&M) Date of decision : 7.12.2011 Surinder Kumar and others ....Appellants vs. Government of Haryana ...Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: None for the appellants. Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. C. B. Goel, Advocate, for HAFED in RFA No. 1449 of 1992. Rajesh Bindal J. This order will dispose of RFA Nos. 1399 and 1449 of 1992, as the same arise out of common award. The landowners are in appeal before this court against the award of the learned court below passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 28.2.1990, issued under Section 4 of the Act, the State of Haryana sought to acquire land situated within the revenue estate of village Sakta-Khera, Tehsil Dabwali, District Sirsa, for construction of Spinning Mills at Sakta-Khera. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, 'the Collector') vide his award dated 7.8.1990 assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 40,000/- per acre for nehri and ` 20,000/- per acre for barani kind of land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below determined the market value of the acquired land @ ` 53,000/- per acre. The landowners have filed the appeals seeking enhancement of compensation. R.F.A. No. 1399 of 1992 2 At the time of hearing, no one has appeared for the appellants. Learned counsel for the respondents very fairly conceded that the issue involved in the present set of appeals is squarely covered by the judgment of this court in RFA No. 1397 of 1992– Balwinder Singh vs Government of Haryana through Collector, Sirsa, decided on 31.3.2009, whereby the award of the learned court below was upheld. Since the award of the learned court below was upheld by this court in Balwinder Singh's case (supra), prima facie, no case for enhancement is made out. However, as no one has appeared for the appellants, the appeals are dismissed in default. 7.12.2011 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge