High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

State Of Haryana And Another vs Ramesh Kumar And Others on 26 March, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Haryana And Another vs Ramesh Kumar And Others on 26 March, 2009
              In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh

                                               R. F. A No. 2388 of 1993 (O&M)


State of Haryana and another                                   ... Appellants
                                          vs
Ramesh Kumar and others                                        ... Respondents
Coram:        Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal


Present:      Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.

Rajesh Bindal J.

The State is in appeal before this court against the award of the
learned court below passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
(for short, ‘the Act’) seeking reduction of compensation for the acquired land.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the State of Haryana vide
notification dated 20.11.1988 issued under Section 4 of the Act, acquired the land
situated in revenue estate of Village Dhankat, District Gurgaon, for construction of
Gurgaon Water Supply Channel. The Land Acquisition Collector assessed the
market value of the land at Rs. 40,000/- per acre for chahi, Rs. 35,000/- per acre
for alabarani, Rs. 32,000/- per acre for bhood and Rs. 25,120/- per acre for gair
mumkin kind of land. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court
below after relying upon the earlier award, Ex. P12, for the acquisition carried out
in the same village on 25.5.1987, determined the market value of the acquired land
@ Rs. 91,600/- per acre.

Learned State counsel very fairly conceded that compensation
assessed by the learned Reference court after relying the earlier award, Ex. P12,
was upheld by this court in R. F. A. No. 3797 of 1992 Amar Nath and others vs
The State of Haryana and
another, decided on 20.12.1994.

Since the compensation payable to the landowners has been upheld
by this court, the claim made in the appeal filed by the State does not survive.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

26.3.2009                                                 ( Rajesh Bindal)
vs.                                                             Judge