R.F.A. No. 1340 of 1989 [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.F.A. No. 1340 of 1989 Date of decision: 1.10.2008 State of Punjab and another .. Appellants v. Surat Singh and others .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. B. B. S. Teji, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the appellants. Mr. R.L. Sharma, Advocate for the respondents. Rajesh Bindal J. The State is in appeal before this Court against the award of the learned Court below for reduction of the amount of compensation on account of severance of land of the respondents. Briefly, the facts are that land measuring 80 kanals 6 marlas was acquired for construction of SYL Canal. Land measuring 7 kanals 2 marlas belonging to the respondents was left out which had become useless and had been converted into a pond by rainy water. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') allowed compensation at the rate of 1/4th of the rate of compensation of land to the respondents on account of severance of their land. Aggrieved against the same, the land owners filed objections which were referred to the learned District Judge, Ropar, who keeping in view the material placed on record by the parties, awarded compensation on account of severance of land @ 50% of the rate of compensation awarded by the Collector. In addition to that, the respondents were also awarded solatium @ 30% of the market value besides an additional amount @ 12% per annum under Section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act'). The primary issue raised in the appeal is grant of severance @ 50% and also solatium and additional benefits under Section 23(1-A) of the Act. Learned counsel for the State submitted that the learned Court below had gone wrong in awarding the aforesaid sums which is not in conformity with law, whereas learned counsel for the respondents referred to a judgment of this Court in State of Punjab v. Mohan Lal, 1997(3) RCR (Civil) 693 to submit that the claim on account of severance @ 50% was upheld by this Court in the aforesaid case. R.F.A. No. 1340 of 1989 [ 2 ] Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The acquisition in the present case was carried out before 1984 for the purpose of construction of SYL canal. The dispute in the present case is on account of supplementary award dated 31.12.1986 on account of severance. The learned Court below awarded 50% of the value of the land on account of severance as against 25% awarded by the Collector. A perusal of the grounds of appeal shows that value for the purposes of jurisdiction of this Court was assessed at Rs. 2459.54, meaning thereby the amount of severance including solatium and benefits under Section 23(1-A) of the Act was only to the sum of Rs. 2459.54. As far as grant of solatium and benefit under Section 23(1-A) of the Act is concerned, the same cannot be denied to the respondents for the reason that the award in the present case was given on 31.12.1986, much after the amendment in the Act. As far as severance is concerned, the same is in conformity with the judgment of this Court in Mohan Lal's case (supra). Even otherwise, considering the fact that acquisition in the present case is more than two decades old and the amount involved is Rs. 2459.54, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned award. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge 1.10.2008 mk