RFA No. 3511 of 1992 -1- In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh RFA No. 3511 of 1992 (O&M) Date of decision : 20.8.2010 Pritam Singh ..... Appellant vs The State of Haryana .... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Balwinder Singh, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal J. The landowner has filed appeal seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired 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 thereof as commercial area. It was followed by notification under Section 6 of the Act on 26.10.1982. The Land Acquisition Collector awarded ` 20/- per square yard as compensation. Aggrieved against the same, the land owners filed objections which were referred to the learned Additional District Judge, who while relying upon earlier award dated 13.12.1991, Ex. P-10, assessed the market value of the acquired land at ` 70/- per square yard and ` 19,245/- and ` 16,603/- for the superstructures. It is this award which is impugned in the present appeal. Learned counsel for the parties did not dispute the fact that the learned court below had determined the market value of the land on the basis of earlier award, Ex. P-10, whereby the market value for the acquired land vide same notification in the same area had been determined at ` 70/- per square yard. The same is 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 and followed subsequently in RFA No. 1057 of 1993 State of Haryana vs Piara Singh decided on 9.3.2009, whereby this Court had assessed the market value of the land acquired vide same notification @ ` 70/- per square yard. RFA No. 3511 of 1992 -2- Since the award of the learned court below is on the basis of judgment of this court, no case for interference is made out. No other argument was raised. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 20.8.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge