Regular First Appeal No.2729 of 1990(O&M) [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... C.M.No.1673-CI of 1991 RFA No.2729 of 1990(O&M) and Cross Objections No.391-CI of 1991 Decided on : November 09, 2009 The State of Punjab ... Appellant VERSUS Smt.Kaushalya Devi and others ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Surender Kapoor, Additional Advocate General for the appellant – State of Punjab. None for the respondents. A.N.JINDAL, J.- The appellant – State of Punjab has challenged the award dated 17.8.1990 passed by Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur, awarding a sum of Rs.45,000/- to the respondents – land-owners in lieu of the standing trees on their acquired land. Besides, solatium @ 30% on the enhanced compensation and interest @ 9% per annum from the date of taking over the possession for one year and, thereafter, @ 15% per annum, till payment, was also awarded. Brief facts of the case are that the land measuring 33 Kanals situated within the revenue estate of village Dholbaha was acquired for Reservoir Area and the award with respect to this land was passed by the Regular First Appeal No.2729 of 1990(O&M) [ 2 ] Land Acquisition Collector on 25.2.1982. However, since no compensation was awarded for the standing trees over the acquired land, therefore, subsequent award dated 6.11.1982 was passed regarding the trees and fruit trees standing on the said land, awarding an amount, as referred to above. The number of standing trees are not in dispute. However, the grievance of the appellant - State is that the compensation, solatium as also the interest have been granted on the higher side. Sh.Ram Sarup, Junior Engineer (RW1) of the Irrigation Department deposed that with the assistance of the Patwari, the trees were counted and the report was sent to the Sub Divisional Officer. He testified that 97 orange trees and 33 lemon trees were standing in the land in dispute. However, he also stated that besides, some trees of Mango, Beri and other categories of fruits were also standing on the land in question. Gurkamal Singh, Horticulture Inspector of Bhunga appeared in the witness box as AW2 and he testified that the estimate (Ex.AW2/1) was prepared by him. Though, this estimate report was prepared in the year 1989, but the Inspector calculated the age of the trees only upto the year 1981, wherein, the trees have been put in four categories i.e, A, B, C, and D. However, it is not clarified as to which trees are of which category. If all the trees are taken of category `D', even then the total value of the trees comes to Rs.52,483/-. In the circumstances, after applying a reasonable cut, the land having been acquired in the year 1981, the sum of Rs.45,000/- has been rightly awarded by the Court below. So far as the solatium and interest part is concerned, the same Regular First Appeal No.2729 of 1990(O&M) [ 3 ] has been awarded as envisaged under the relevant provisions of the Act. No illegality, much less any irregularity suggesting interference could be detected in the impugned order. Resultantly, the appeal as well as the cross-objection petition being without merit are dismissed. November 09, 2009 ( A.N.JINDAL ) `gian' JUDGE