Rameshwar Singh Malik, J.

This batch of 522 appeals out of which 272 appeals bearing RFA Nos. 2491 to 2507, 2610, 3229 to 3272 of 2007; 1, 2, 3, 5, 366, 367, 559 to 568, 1087 to 1104, 1112, 1289, 1639 to 1669, 3419 to 3432, 3445 to 3453, 3499 to 3515, 3730 to 3738, 5327 to 5348, 5351, 5352 of 2008; 2688, 3767 to 3772, 3850 to 3872, 5461, 5462, 5493 of 2009; 1100 to 1127 of 2010; 7194 of 2012; 1279, 1283 to 1289 of 2014, filed by the Railway Department and 250 appeals bearing RFA Nos. 2921 to 2938, 3908, 4397 to 4424, 4490 to 4493 of 2007; 447, 659, 676, 1358, 1720 to 1722, 1772 to 1779, 1785 to 1787, 1888, 1895 to 1898, 1902 to 1905, 1907 to 1912, 1927 to 1929, 1951 to 1953, 2458 to 2465, 2543 to 2555, 2632 to 2635, 2667, 2668, 2868, 3021, 3022, 3241, 3587, 3588, 3719 to 3725, 3783, 3975, 4565, 4596 to 4600, 4836, 4851, 4954, 5201, 5219 to 5225, 5366 to 5380, 5494 and 5573 of 2008; 366 to 371, 375 to 377, 416, 1954, 2063, 2259, 2260, 2888, 2926, 2927, 3127 to 3131, 3161, 3354, 3400, 3410, 3411, 4896, 5918 of 2009; 1812 to 1815, 3251, 3284, 3489, 4196 to 4200, 4640 to 4645, 4650 to 4652, 4893, 5049, 5206 to 5210, 5212 of 2010; 2006 to 2016, 3691 to 3693, 4325, 7372 of 2011; 781 of 2012; 1093, 1780, 3816 to 3820, 4282 and 4283 of 2013 filed by the landowners, alongwith cross objections bearing Nos. XOBJR Nos. 28-CI-2008 to 30-CI-2008, 5-CI, 39-CI, 72-CI, 83-CI, 84-CI- 2009, 164-CI-2010, 28-CI-2014, 62-CI, 63-CI, 65-CI to 71-CI, 73-CI, 74- CI, 235-CI to 237-CI and 244-CI-2016, is being decided vide this common order, as all these appeals arise out of the same acquisition and raise identical questions of law and facts. Since the purpose of the acquisition was the same namely; laying down of Railway Line from Chandigarh to Ludhiana, however, notifications were different, it would be appropriate to deal with the evidence either village-wise or common evidence for more than one villages, wherever fact situation so warrants.

Villages Kambala and Kambali

2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties and for the facility of reference, facts are being culled out from RFA No. 3161 of 2009 (Jasmer Singh v. State of Punjab).

3. Briefly put, facts of the cases pertaining to abovesaid two villages namely Kambali and Kambala, are that land measuring 258 kanal 8 marla was sought to be acquired out of revenue estate of village Kambala, Tehsil and District Ropar (Now District Mohali), at public expenses for public purpose namely; laying down railway line from Chandigarh to Ludiana as well as for construction of Railway Station at Mohali. Accordingly, notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ('the Act' for short), came to be issued on 16.6.1999, which was followed by notification dated 14.6.2000 under Section 6 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector ('LAC' for short), vide his award No.1 dated 4.6.20001, assessed the market value of the acquired land at the uniform rate of Rs. 10 lacs per acre without resorting to any belting system. The learned reference court, vide impugned award dated 15.12.2008, assessed the market value of the acquired land of village Kambala at the uniform rate of Rs. 17 lacs per acre. The learned reference court also granted 20% of the abovesaid market value, as compensation, on account of severance charges, but only to some landowners.

4. Similarly, land measuring 45 kanal was sought to be acquired from the revenue estate of adjoining village Kambali. Another piece of land measuring 11 kanal 3 marla was also sought to be acquired out of this very village Kambali. Accordingly, notification dated 24.6.2000 was issued under Section 4 of the Act qua the land measuring 45 kanal and for the land measuring 11 kanal 3 marla, it was issued on 6.2.2001. Purpose of the acquisition was same. LAC, vide his award No.6 dated 9.4.2001 passed qua land measuring 45 kanal and award No. 17 dated 1