R.F.A. No. 589 of 1997 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.F.A. No. 589 of 1997 (O&M) Date of decision : 23.12.2010 Girraj .... Appellant vs State of Haryana and another .... Respondents Coram : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present:- Mr. Lokesh Sinhal and Mr. Ashok K. Sharma, Advocates, for the landowners. Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. RAJESH BINDAL, J This order shall dispose of Regular First Appeal Nos. 589, 1420, 1421, 1739 of 1997, 1929 of 2004 and 2309 of 2006, arising out of same acquisition. The landowners have filed appeals seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land whereas by filing appeals the State of Haryana is seeking reduction thereof. Briefly, the facts are that land situated in the revenue estate of village Pala, Hadbast No. 128, Tehsil Ballabgarh, District Faridabad was acquired vide notification dated 23.3.1993 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act') for the purpose of construction of road for Sector 33, Faridabad-Ballabgarh Controlled Area. The Land Acquisition Collector determined the market value of the acquired land @ ` 150/- per square yard for the land of khasra no. 34/11/2 and ` 50/- per square yard for the remaining land. Aggrieved against the award of the Collector, the land owners filed objections which were referred to the learned court below, who keeping in view the material placed on record by the parties, assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 150/- per square yard. Aggrieved against the award of 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 appeal are squarely covered by judgment of this court in RFA No. 1735 of 1996- S. C. Garg and another vs The State of Haryana and others decided on 21.4.2009, whereby the award of the learned reference court determining the market value of acquired land @ ` 150/-, was upheld. R.F.A. No. 589 of 1997 (2) Since this court in S.C.Garg's case (supra) had upheld the award of the learned reference court, no case for interference is made out. Accordingly, for the reasons recorded in the aforesaid judgment, the appeals are dismissed. 23.12.2010. (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge