UDGMENT :

HARKESH MANUJA, J. 

This order shall dispose off the present sixty-seven (67) appeals bearing RFA Nos. 2320 (lead case), 2350, 2923, 2924, 2925, 2926, 2927, 2928, 2929, 3089, 3455, 3456, 3457, 3458, 3459, 3460, 3461, 3462, 3463, 3464, 3465, 3466, 3679, 3680, 3681, 3682, 3708, 3709, 3710, 3711, 3742, 4107, 4108, 4109, 4110, 4111, 4112, 4113, 4115, 4116, 4314, 4320 & 4818 of 2016; 63, 64, 65, 66, 1936, 1937, 1938, 1939, 1940, 1941, 2588, 2664, 2682, 3373, 3374, 3375, 3414, 3415, 3477, 3532, 3883 & 5500 of 2017; 2019 & 2352 of 2019; as the same arise out of common acquisition / award.

[2] In all appeals, the appellant(s)-landowner(s) are seeking further enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. Since the common question of law and facts are involved in these appeals, therefore, for the sake of convenience, facts are being culled out from RFA No. 2320 of 2016, the appeal filed by landowner-Ram Kishan Suhag.

[3] The appellant-landowner, having instituted the aforesaid appeal, preferred under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “1894 Act”), sought modification of the award dated 20.01.2016 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Rohtak (hereinafter to be referred as “Reference Court”), for enhancement of compensation amount.

FACTS

[4] Briefly stating, certain land owned by the appellant situated within the revenue estate of Village Sunaria Kalan, Hadbast No. 101, Tehsil and District Rohtak, came to be acquired vide notifications dated 24.12.2007 and 23.12.2008 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the 1894 Act respectively, for the public purpose, namely, “Special Zone–Sector-21, Rohtak”. Vide Award No. 11, dated 23.06.2010, the Land Acquisition Collector, Rohtak (for short “LAC’) determined the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.25 lakhs per acre for all types of land alongwith other statutory benefits.

[5] Aggrieved of the aforesaid Award dated 23.06.2010, landowners / interested persons filed reference under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, which were party allowed vide decision dated 20.01.2016 by the learned Reference Court, whereby the market value of the entire land was assessed/enhanced at the rate of Rs.27,88,000/- per acre alongwith other statutory benefits. Dissatisfied with the aforesaid decision of the learned Reference Court, the present appeal(s) were preferred at the instance of appellant(s)-landowner(s).

CONTENTION(S):

ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT(S)-LANDOWNER(S)

[6] Impugning the aforesaid Reference Court’s award dated 20.01.2016, learned counsel(s) for the appellant(s)-landowner(s) submits that the learned Reference Court went wrong having discarded the sale instances Exhibits P-1 to P-16 and P-18 vide which different parcels of land pertaining to the same revenue estate of Village Sunaria Kalan were sold with the base price per acre ranging from Rs. 31 lakhs to Rs. 1,22,00,000/- between February 2006 till December 2007.

[6.1] Learned counsel further submits that in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case “Horrmal (Deceased) through his LRs and others Versus State of Haryana and others”, reported as 2024 (4) RCR (Civil) 758, out of the sale instances Exhibits P-1 to P-18 pertaining to the same revenue estate of Village Sunaria Kalan, the sale exemplar fetching the highest sale price was required to be taken into account for the purpose of determination of market value by applying suitable deduction thereupon towards smallness of area involved in such sale exemplar besides application of deduction towards development cost.

[6.2] Learned counsel for the appellant(s)-landowner(s) thus submit(s) that the market value of the acquired land in the present case was required to be re-assessed and enhanced accordingly.

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT(S)-STATE OF HARYANA

[7] On the other hand, learned counsel representing the respondents-State of Haryana submits that the sale deeds Exhibits P- 1 to P-16 & P-18 though pertained to the same revenue estate of Village Sunaria Ka