RFA No. 3559 of 1992 -1- In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh RFA No. 3559 of 1992 (O&M) Date of decision: 5.2.2010 Mohinder Singh .. Appellant vs State of Haryana .. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal. Present: Mr. Surinder Gandhi, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. D. D. Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal, J. The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the landowner seeking further enhancement of compensation on account of acquisition of land. Briefly, the facts are that the land in question, situated in village Ferozepur Kalan, District Ambala was acquired vide notification dated 30.3.1982 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act') for development and utilisation of land as commercial area. It was followed by notification under Section 6 of the Act on 26.10.1982. The Land Acquisition Collector gave award of Rs. 20/- per square yard. Aggrieved against the same, the land owners filed objections which were referred to the learned Additional District Judge, who keeping in view the material placed on record by the parties, awarded Rs. 70/- per square yard for the acquired land and Rs. 19578.75 paise for the super structure. It is a case where the landowner has failed to adduce evidence to substantiate his claim regarding value of the land as well as superstructure. The learned court below, in the absence of any evidence on behalf of the landowner, had determined the market value of the land on the basis of earlier award, Ex. P9, whereby the market value for the acquired land vide same notification in the same area has been determined at Rs. 70/- per square yard. The same was in conformity with the judgment of this Court in RFA No. 2859 of 1992 – Faquiria vs The State of Haryana, decided on 19.1.1996, whereby this Court had assessed the market value of the land acquired vide same notification @ Rs. 70/- per square yard. RFA No. 3559 of 1992 -2- Learned counsel for the landowner did not refer to any judgment whereby different amount of compensation was assessed for the land acquired vide same notification. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 5.2.2010 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge