R.F.A. No. 832 of 1994 [ 1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.F.A. No. 832 of 1994 (O&M) Date of decision: 17.12.2010 Union of India .. Appellant v. Piara and others .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Dr. Anmol Rattan Sidhu, Senior Advocate with Mr. D. D. Sharma, Standing Counsel and Mr. Brijeshwar Singh Kanwar, Advocate for Union of India. Mr. R.A. Yadav, Advocate for the land owners. ... Rajesh Bindal J. This order will dispose of R.F.A. Nos. 832 to 835 and 2771 of 1994, as common questions of law and facts are involved. Union of India is in appeal seeking reduction in the amount of compensation awarded by the learned court below to the land owners for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts of the case are that vide notification dated 5.8.1983, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act'), State of Haryana acquired 246 acres 0 kanal and 10 marlas of land, situated in village Nainwal, Tehsil and District Gurgaon for Field Firing Range. The same was followed by notification dated 23.2.1984, issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') assessed the market value @ ` 30,000/- per acre for chahi land; ` 11,000/- per acre for Gair Mumkinland; ` 25,000/- per acre for Ala Barani land; ` 22,000/- per acre for Bhood land and ` 15,000/- per acre for Banjar kind of land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the land owners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below assessed the market value of the R.F.A. No. 832 of 1994 [ 2] acquired land @ ` 50,000/- per acre. A perusal of the impugned award shows that the learned court below had relied upon an earlier award dated 1.12.1992 in LA Case No. 113 of 1991 – Ram Chander etc. v. Haryana State and another, relating to the same acquisition and assessed the compensation for the acquired land in terms thereof. Learned counsel for Union of India has not been able to point out as to whether any appeal was filed against the aforesaid award or not. Once the learned court below has assessed the compensation for the acquired land in terms of an earlier award pertaining to the same acquisition which, as per the material available before the court, had attained finality, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned award. Even otherwise, notification under Section 4 of the Act in the present case was issued on 5.8.1983 and the assessment of compensation is @ ` 50,000/- per acre, considering the time gap of 27 years, further I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned award. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed. ( Rajesh Bindal ) Judge 17.12.2010 mk