R.F.A. No. 481 of 1998 [ 1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: November 05, 2008 (1) R.F.A. No. 481 of 1998 Pirthi Singh (deceased) through his LRs and others .. Appellants v. State of Haryana and another .. Respondents (2) R.F.A. No. 356 of 1998 Ram Kishan .. Appellants v. State of Haryana and another .. Respondents (3) R.F.A. No. 483 of 1998 Shamsher Singh and another .. Appellants v. State of Haryana and others .. Respondents (4) R.F.A. No. 484 of 1998 Chandan Singh and others .. Appellants v. State of Haryana and another .. Respondents (5) R.F.A. No. 485 of 1998 Ramji Lal and others .. Appellants v. State of Haryana and another .. Respondents R.F.A. No. 481 of 1998 [ 2] (6) R.F.A. No. 486 of 1998 Ram Kumar and another .. Appellants v. State of Haryana and another .. Respondents (7) R.F.A. No. 487 of 1998 Maya Devi and another .. Appellants v. State of Haryana and another .. Respondents (8) R.F.A. No. 524 of 1998 Jagvir Singh .. Appellant v. State of Haryana and another .. Respondents (9) R.F.A. No. 303 of 1999 Daulat Ram .. Appellant v. State of Haryana and another .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Pritam Saini, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana for the State. Rajesh Bindal J. This order will dispose of a bunch of above mentioned 9 appeals, as the same arise out of a common acquisition. However, the facts have been extracted from R.F.A. No. 481 of 1998. The land owners are in appeal against the award of the learned court below seeking enhancement of the compensation for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts are that land measuring 1.94 acres in Village Palwal, HB No. 373, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra was acquired vide notification dated 9.11.1987, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, R.F.A. No. 481 of 1998 [ 3] 1894 (for short, `the Act') for construction of road from Umri road to Village Palwal. The same was followed by notification dated 26.9.1988 issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') determined the market value at Rs. 36,000/- per acre for chahi land and Rs. 9,000/- per acre for Gair Mumkin Chahi, Nadi and Johar kind of land. The learned Additional District Judge, on reference under Section 18 of the Act, assessed the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 36,000/- per acre for all categories of land. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the land in question was acquired for the purpose of construction of a road from Umri road to Village Palwal. In fact, the entire area in the vicinity had already been developed. The Officers' Colony, Mini Secretariat, Sectors 7 and 13-HUDA had already been developed. In fact, subsequent to the present acquisition even the other land in Villages Devi Das Pura, Ratgal, Umri and Palwal was acquired vide notification dated 21.4.1992, for which the value of the land was assessed by this Court at Rs. 7,26,000/- per acre vide judgment of this Court in R.F.A. No. 1006 of 1996 –Arjan Singh and others v. State of Haryana, decided on 26.4.2006. Value of the land pertaining to acquisition for Sector 7 which was also prior to the present acquisition was assessed at Rs. 1,70,080/- per acre vide judgment dated 30.8.2004 in L.P.A. No. 681 of 1991 –Arjan Singh (deceased) through LRs and others v. The State of Haryana. The acquisition therein was vide notification dated 11.3.1981. Reliance was also placed upon a judgment of this Court in Gurbachan Singh v. State of Haryana, (1994-3) PLR 318 pertaining to acquisition of land for Sector 11. The prayer is that the value of the land, as determined by the learned court below, deserves enhancement keeping in view the aforesaid facts. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that keeping in view the location of the land and the material on record, the value, as assessed by the learned court below, does not call for any further increase. However, he did not dispute the fact that vide aforesaid judgments, the value of the acquired land therein was assessed, as referred to above. With regard to the aforesaid judgments, the submission is that the same are not applicable as the location of the land therein is at a different and more strategic place, as compared to the land in question which was a small strip of land acquired for the purpose of construction of a road leading to the village. Heard learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance perused the relevant referred record. A perusal of site plan (Ex. P1) on record shows the location of the acquired land which is a small piece of 1.94 acres only acquired for the purpose of R.F.A. No. 481 of 1998 [ 4] construction of a road. It is a case where this Court will have to apply a thumb rule keeping in view the location of the land and also the development which had already taken place in the area close to the acquired land, though in the evidence produced on record by the appellants in the form of sale deeds, the land pertaining thereto is situated at different places. All the sale deeds pertained to the land which is quite close to the city. Accordingly, those as such cannot be relied upon for the purpose of determination of fair value of the acquired land in the present case, which was not situated so close to the city. However, keeping in view the fact that the area in the vicinity was being developed; Officers' Colony including the residences of Deputy Commissioner and Superintendent of Police were not far off from the acquired land, in my opinion, it would be appropriate to award compensation @ Rs. 70,000/- per acre for the entire acquired land. The appellants shall also be entitled to the statutory benefits available under the Act. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed in the above terms. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge November 05 , 2008 mk