High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Smt.Nirmal And Others vs The State Of Haryana And Another on 23 December, 2008

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Smt.Nirmal And Others vs The State Of Haryana And Another on 23 December, 2008
RFA No.1395 of 1992             -1 -


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

                                             RFA No.1395 of 1992

                                             Date of Decision: 23.12.2008

Smt.Nirmal and others
                                                          ..Appellants.

Vs.

The State of Haryana and another
                                                          ..Respondents.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN


Present:    Mr.C.B.Goel, Advocate for the appellants.

            Ms.Mamta Singla Talwar, AAG Haryana for the respondents.


RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J.

This order shall dispose of 10 Regular First Appeals bearing

Nos.1395,1447,3175,3176 of 1992, 18 of 1993, 3687 of 1993 with X

Objection No.41-CI of 1994, 1414 to 1416 and 1479 of 1992 by a common

order as identical question of law and facts are involved therein.

Briefly stated the facts of the case are that vide notification

issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the

`Act’) dated 18/20.11.1988 published on 6.12.1988, land in village Dhankot

was acquired for public purpose, namely, for the construction of Gurgaon

Water Supply Channel. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short `the

Collector’) assessed the market value of the acquired land @ Rs.40,000/- per

acre for Chahi, Rs.35,040/- per acre for Albarani, Rs.32,000/- per acre for

Bhur and Rs.25,120/- per acre for Gair Mumkin land.

The learned Reference Court while relying upon previous
RFA No.1395 of 1992 -2 –

award Ex.PX redetermined the compensation @ Rs.75,000/- per acre for

Chahi, Rs.66,000/- per acre for Albarani (Magda), Rs.58,000/- per acre and

Rs.41,000/- per acre for Bhur and Gair Mumkin land respectively besides

awarding all the statutory benefits in terms of the provisions of the

Amended Act and 25% on account of the severance charges.

Sh.C.B.Goel, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

appellants has submitted that the present appeals are covered by the decision

of this Court rendered in RFA No.888 of 1992 Honda Ram Vs. State of

Haryana and another decided on 4.11.2008 wherein while relying upon a

decision in RFA No.3797 of 1992 compensation has been enhanced to the

tune of Rs.1,05,340/- per acre and severance charges has been increased to

50%.

The aforesaid statement of the learned counsel for the

appellants has not been disputed by the learned counsel for the respondents.

In view of the above, the present appeals are also allowed in

terms of the order passed in RFA No.888 of 1992 titled as Honda Ram Vs.

State of Haryana and another decided on 4.11.2008. The appellants shall

also be entitled to all the statutory benefits in terms of the provisions of the

Amended Act with the costs of these appeals.




                                               (Rakesh Kumar Jain)
23.12.2008                                            Judge
Meenu