107 (02 cases)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (1) RFA No. 92 of 1996 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 20.01.2026 Sh. R.N. Gupta and another ...Appellants Versus The State of Haryana and others ...Respondents AND (2) RFA No. 93 of 1996 (O&M)

Som Parkash and others ...Appellants Versus The State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. Deepak Singh Saini, Advocate for the appellant(s)-landowner(s).

Mr. Abhinash Jain, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for the respondent Nos. 1 & 3 / State of Haryana.

Mr. Nischal Manchanda, Advocate and Mr. Akash Choudhary, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 & 4.

****

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

This order shall dispose off the present two appeals bearing RFA Nos. 92 & 93 of 1996, as the same arise out of common acquisition / award.

[2] The appellants-landowners, by instituting the present appeals, preferred under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “1894 Act”), seek modification of the award dated 04.09.1995 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Kaithal (hereinafter to be referred as “Reference Court”), for enhancement of compensation amount.

FACTS [3] Briefly stating, certain land owned by the appellants situated within the revenue estate of Village Fatehpur (Pundri), Hadbast No. 8, Tehsil Kaithal, District Kurukshetra (now District Kaithal),came to be acquired vide notifications dated 14.07.1976 and 05.01.1977 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the 1894 Act respectively, for the public purpose namely “for the establishment of vegetable market at Fatehpur, Tehsil Kaithal, District Kurukshetra”. Vide Award No. 10-A, dated 06.06.1986, the Land Acquisition Collector, Directorate of Agriculture, Haryana, Panchkula (for short “LAC’) determined the value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.9,440/- per acre alongwith other statutory benefits.

[4] Aggrieved of the aforesaid Award dated 06.06.1986, landowners / interested persons filed reference under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, which were disposed off vide decision dated 04.09.1995 by the learned Reference Court, whereby the market value of the entire land was assessed at the rate of Rs. 30,967/- per acre alongwith other statutory benefits. Dissatisfied with the aforesaid decision of the learned Reference Court, the present appeal(s) have been preferred at the instance of appellant(s)-landowner(s).

CONTENTION(S):

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

[5] Impugning the aforesaid Reference Court’s award dated 04.09.1995, learned counsel(s) for the appellant(s)-landowner(s) submits that the learned Reference Court while passing the award failed to take into account the sale deeds produced by the landowners, especially the sale transaction dated 11.10.1974 (Exhibit P-3) which pertains to the same revenue estate of Village Fatehpur Pundri, vide which 500 square of land was sold for Rs. 15,000/- i.e. Rs. 1,45,200/- per acre. Learned counsel submits that for the smallness of area involved in sale transaction Exhibit P-3, the learned Reference Court could have applied suitable deduction and as such, the market value was required to be re-assessed and enhanced accordingly.

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT(S)-STATE OF HARYANA [6] On the other hand, learned counsel(s) representing the respondents-State of Haryana and Marketing Board submit(s) that no interference is called for in the well-reasoned judgment/award passed by the learned Reference Court, which was based on proper appreciation of evidence and the material available on record and therefore, it is prayed that the present appeals are liable to be dismissed.

DISCUSSION AND REASONING [7] After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the paper-book / records, I find substance in the submission(s) made on behalf of the appellant(s)-landowner(s).

[8] Upon perusal of record, it has been found that based on the material available, a positive finding of fact has been recorded by the learned Reference Court to the effect