R.F.A. No. 87 of 1984 [ 1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular First Appeal No. 87 of 1984 Date of decision: September 01, 2008 Shiv Ram and others .. Appellants v. The Punjab State and another .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. T. N. Sarup, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Manohar Lall, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for the respondents. ... Rajesh Bindal J. Dissatisfied with the award of the learned Court below where compensation for acquisition of land had been enhanced from Rs. 2,857.60 per ghumaon to Rs. 10,000/- per ghumaon, the appellants for further enhancement of compensation are in appeal before this Court. Briefly, the facts are that the land of the appellants was acquired for the purpose of Mukerian Hydel Channel Project vide notification dated 14.10.1980 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act'). The same was followed by notification dated 7.11.1980 issued under Section 6 of the Act. The award was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') on 11.9.1981 assessing the value of the land at Rs. 2,857.60 per ghumaon for the Barani land which was acquired. Aggrieved against the award of the Collector, the appellants filed objections which were referred to the Court below for determination. Considering the evidence led by the parties on record, the learned Court below assessed the compensation of the value of the land at Rs. 10,000/- per ghumaon. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that assessment of compensation by the learned Court below is not fair keeping in view the R.F.A. No. 87 of 1984 [ 2] value of the land as on the date of acquisition. He relied upon Ex. A. 9 and A.10, award by the Court below in the case of acquisition of land for the same purpose falling in villages Asafpur and Sowar which, according to the learned counsel for the appellants, is similarly situated. On the basis thereof, the claim is for compensation at the rate of Rs. 16,000/- per ghumaon. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. None of the counsel for the parties has pointed out as to whether any other appeal arising out of the same acquisition has been decided or is pending for decision. As far as award (Ex. A. 9) of the learned Court below is concerned, the same pertained to acquisition of the land for the same purpose, but situated in Village Asafpur and other Villages Sandhwal, Sawar, Sheikhan Matta and Badalian. The Collector awarded a compensation of Rs. 5,443.20 per ghumaon to the land owners which was ultimately determined at Rs. 16,000/- per ghumaon. A perusal of the award shows that for arriving at the amount of compensation payable to the land owners, reliance was placed upon mutation. Similarly, as regards Ex. A. 10 is concerned, the same pertained to acquisition of land situated in Village Sowar where also the Collector assessed the compensation at Rs. 5,972.52 per ghumaon. There also, relying upon various mutations, the compensation was assessed at Rs. 16,000/- per ghumaon. As against this, the learned Court below relied upon award Ex. R.6 pertaining to the acquisition of land in Village Passi Karora where the compensation was determined at Rs. 10,000/- per ghumaon. The land, vide award Ex. R.6, was acquired for the construction of Hydel Channel between R. D. No. 13,000 to R.D. No. 13,600. The learned Court below had tried to differentiate the value of the land pertaining to the land owners in awards Ex. A.9 and A.10 on the ground that the land of the appellants is situated in the upper reaches of the Hydel Channel which area consists of stony solid, whereas the land forming part of awards Ex. A.9 and A.10 is situated 600 meters down stream which consists of better terrain and almost free of stones. The land forming part of Ex. A.9 and A.10 is situated between R.D. 15,310.200 and R.D. 16,851.563. As against this, if the situation of land in Ex. R.6 is considered, the same is between R.D. 13,000 and R.D. 13,600, which is situated more on the upper R.F.A. No. 87 of 1984 [ 3] side of the Hydel Channel meaning thereby it contained more stony solids. If the principle as applied by the learned Court below for determination of the value of the land is considered, the value of the land of the appellants cannot possibly be assessed at the same rate at which the land forming part of award Ex. R.6 is valued for the simple reason that the same is situated on the higher side of the Hydel Channel which obviously will be having more stony solids. However, as it has come on record that the land of the appellants is situated close to the land in dispute in award Ex. R.6, as compared to the land in awards Ex. A.9 and A.10. Accordingly, in my opinion, it would be appropriate to assess the value thereof at Rs. 12,000/- per ghumaon as against Rs. 10,000/- per ghumaon awarded by the learned Court below. The appellants shall also be entitled to statutory benefits as are admissible under the Act. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed with costs throughout. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge September 01 , 2008 mk