RFA No. 618 of 2011 (1) IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH RFA No. 618 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 31.5.2011 Maya Singh @ Maha Singh and others ...Appellants vs State of Haryana and others ..Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. R. A. Sheoran, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. D. D. Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal, J. The landowners have filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. Briefly the facts of the case are that the State of Haryana vide notification dated 13.2.2004 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') sought to acquire land situated within the revenue estate of village Harikot, Tehsil and District Hisar, for construction of Hisar-Ghaggar Multiple Channel. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 27.10.2004. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, 'the Collector'), vide award dated 5.7.2005 assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 5,00,000/- per acre. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below, assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 6,00,000/- per acre. Aggrieved against the impugned award, the landowners are in appeal before this court. Learned counsel for the landowners submitted that value of the land as assessed by the learned court below is not just and fair. The acquired land was quite close to the already developed area as it was hardly at a distance of 6-7 kilometers from Hisar City. It had great potential for being used as residential, commercial and industrial purposes. The value of the RFA No. 618 of 2011 (2) acquired land at the time of acquisition was not less than ` 20,00,000/- per acre. No documentary evidence in the form of sale-deed was produced on record by the landowners to show the value of the land at the time of acquisition. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that in the absence of any evidence produced on record by the landowners, no case for enhancement of compensation could possibly be made out. He further submitted that value of the land in the area at the time of acquisition was not more than ` 2,00,000/- per acre. It was only on account of the policy issued by the State Government fixing minimum rates in different parts of the State that the landowners were awarded ` 5,00,000/- per acre by the Collector which was enhanced to ` 6,00,000/- per acre by the learned court below. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant referred record. A perusal of the impugned award shows that the landowners have produced only oral evidence to show the value of the acquired land. The valuation report, Ex. P-2, of PW-1 Om Kar Singh, Patwari, has no evidentiary value as nothing has been pointed out as to on what basis it was prepared. No documentary evidence in the form of sale instances in the area has been brought on record by them which could justify any further increase. The State had, in fact, assessed the value of the acquired land on the basis of policy framed by it for assessing the compensation for the land acquired in different areas of the State. As there is nothing on record to evaluate the market value assessed by the learned court below, I do not find any case has been made out by the landowners for enhancement of compensation. For the reasons mentioned above, I do not find any merit in the appeal. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay in refiling the appeal is also dismissed. 31.5.2011 (Rajesh Bindal) vs Judge