RFA No. 1568 of 1991 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh RFA No. 1568 of 1991 (O&M) Date of decision : 22.2.2011 State of Haryana and another ... Appellants vs Nafe Singh ..... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. D. D. Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. J. S. Yadav, Advocate, Mr. Vikram Singh Prabhakar, Advocate for Mr. Jagdish Manchanda, Advocate, Mr. Vikas Awasthy, Advocate for Mr. Sandeep Vermani, Advocate, in RFA No. 1964 of 1991, for the landowners. Rajesh Bindal J. This order will dispose of appeals bearing RFA Nos. 1568, 1851, 1964 of 1991, 1106, 1388, 1389, 2280, 2386 of 1992, 1161, 2218, 2474 of 1993 and 734 of 1994, as common questions of laws and facts are involved therein. The State of Haryana has filed appeals seeking reduction of compensation awarded to the landowners for the acquired land, whereas the landowners have filed appeals seeking enhancement thereof. The bunch of appeals pertain to the valuation of land acquired for construction of Gurgaon Water Supply Channel vide notification dated 18.11.1988 which was published on 6.12.1988 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') by the State of Haryana, situated within the revenue estates of villages Mankrola, Budhera, Kherki Majra Dhankot, Iqbalpur, Dhankot and Canjrola, Tehsil and District Gurgaon. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 25.1.1989 and published on 28.2.1989. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short 'the Collector') assessed the market value of the acquired land. The land owners RFA No. 1568 of 1991 (2) being dissatisfied with the award of the Collector filed objections which were referred to the learned Court below. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned Court below assessed the compensation of the acquired land of different villages at different rates. Aggrieved against the award of the learned court below, both the parties are in appeal before this court. Learned counsel for the landowners submitted that the issues raised in the present set of appeals are squarely covered by judgment of this court in RFA No. 888 of 1992 Honda Ram vs State of Haryana and another, decided on 4.11.2008, whereby the compensation payable to the landowners was further enhanced. Learned State counsel did not dispute the aforesaid factual position especially for the reason that the award of the Collector for all the villages was similar. Since this court had further enhanced the compensation payable to the landowners for the acquired land, the appeals filed by the State for reduction of compensation do not survive. Accordingly, for the reasons recorded in Honda Ram's case (supra), the appeals filed by the State are dismissed and that of the landowners are disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment. 22.2.2011 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge