R.F.A. No. 958 of 1991 -1- In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh R.F.A. No. 958 of 1991 (O&M) Date of decision : 16.8.2010 Tek Chand and others ..... Appellants vs State of Punjab and another ..... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Pritam Saini, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Yatinder Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Rajesh Bindal J. The claimants are in appeal before this court against the award of the learned court below seeking further enhancement of compensation for the fruit and non-fruit bearing trees existing on the acquired land. Briefly, the facts of the case are that vide notification dated 5/6.9.1985 issued under Section 4 of the Act, State of Punjab, acquired the land along with superstructures, fruit/non-fruit bearing trees situated in revenue estates of Village Manakpur, for construction of SYL canal. The Land Acquisition Collector awarded compensation. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below determined the market value of the trees. It is this award which is impugned before this court. Learned counsel for the claimants submitted that the amount of compensation assessed by the learned court below on account of trees existing on the acquired land, on the date of acquisition, is not just and fair considering the amount spent by the claimants on the plantation of trees and the maintenance thereof. The evidence produced by the claimants on that account was totally ignored. Life of the trees was not considered at all. No other point was argued. On the other hand, learned State counsel submitted that in the absence of any independent evidence on record, the claimants should not be granted any further increase on the amount as assessed by the learned Reference Court, rather, the same deserves to be reduced. In fact, the award of the Collector deserves to be upheld and the amount awarded by the learned court below be set aside. R.F.A. No. 958 of 1991 -2- Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper-book. As far as the assessment of value of the eucalyptus trees is concerned, the learned court below has granted compensation at the rate of two crops which is in terms of judgment of this court in 1990 (1) Recent Revenue Reports 2 Sukhdev Singh vs State of Punjab and another. In Sukhdev Singh's case (supra), this court had granted increase in the valuation of trees considering the crops they yield, therefore, it cannot be said that the award of the court below is inadequate. Accordingly, the value as assessed by the learned court below for the trees is just and fair. The appeal is dismissed. 16.8.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge