R. F. A No. 1241 of 1993 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Date of decision : 16.9.2010 1. RFA No. 1241 of 1993 (O&M) State of Haryana ... Appellant vs Babu Lal ... Respondent 2. RFA No. 1242 of 1993 (O&M) Haryana State ... Appellant vs Smt. Shankuntla Devi and others ... Respondents 3. RFA No. 1592 of 1993 (O&M) Babu Lal ... Appellant vs State of Haryana ... Respondent 4. RFA No. 1593 of 1993 (O&M) Smt. Shakuntla Devi and others ... Appellants vs Haryana State ... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. R. A. Yadav, Advocate, for the landowners. Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal J. This order shall dispose of the aforesaid appeals arising out of common acquisition. The landowners have filed appeals seeking further enhancement of compensation whereas the State has filed appeals seeking reduction of compensation. Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 17.8.1979 pubished in Gazette on 28.8.1979 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), the State of Haryana acquired land situated within the revenue estate of Village Mubarakpur, Hadbast No. 37, Tehsil R. F. A No. 1241 of 1993 (2) and District Gurgaon, for construction of Gurgaon-Jhajjar Road to village Mubarakpur. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, “the Collector”) assessed the market value of the acquired @ ` 8,000/- per acre for chahi, ` 6,000/- per acre for narmot, and ` 2,000/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land. 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 acquired land @ ` 15,000/- per acre for chahi and ` 3,750/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land. It is this award which is impugned in the present set of appeals by both the parties. Learned counsel for the landowners submitted that the court below had not assessed just and fair compensation for the acquired land. It was submitted that the land in question was located near the railway station and adjacent to village abadi. The court below has failed to consider the evidence produced on record by the landowner. It was prayed that the award of the court below be set aside and the amount of compensation be enhanced. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that the court below had wrongly assessed the compensation. The evidence produced on record by the State in the form of sale-deeds, Ex. R1 to R-3 was not considered. It was submitted that the amount of compensation assessed by the Collector was just and fair. It was prayed that the award of the court below be set aside and that of the Collector be restored. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper- book. Considering the fact that the land in question was acquired 31 years back, I would not like to interfere in the appeals filed by the State as it was acquisition of a small portion of land acquired for construction of road. As far as appeals by the landowners are concerned there is no evidence on record which could justify any further increase as sufficient amount of compensation has already been awarded by the court below. Accordingly, the award of the court below is upheld and the appeals are dismissed. 16.9.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge