(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) (cid:1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ****

CM-5499-CI-2021 IN/AND RFA-2600-2001 Bahadur Chand (since deceased)

through his LR Ravinder Kumar . . . . Applicant-Appellant Vs.

State of Haryana through Collector and another . . . . Respondents ****

Reserved on: 29.01.2026 Pronounced on: 02.02.2026 Pronounced fully/ Operative: Fully ****

CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA ****

Argued by: - Mr. Puneet Jindal, Sr. Advocate with (cid:1)

Mr. Rohit Sharma, Advocate (cid:1)

For the applicant(s)-appellant(s) in (cid:1)

CM-1844-CI-2025 in/and RA-RF-39-2021 in RFA-2600-2001. (cid:1)

Mr. Y.P. Malik, Advocate with (cid:1)

Mr. Ankur Malik, Advocate for the (cid:1)

Applicant(s)-appellant(s) in rest of cases. (cid:1)

Mr. Gaurav Garg, AAG, Haryana. (cid:1)

****

DEEPAK GUPTA, J.

This order shall dispose of twenty-four review applications filed under Order XLVII Rule 1 read with Sections 114 and 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking reconsideration of the judgment dated 29.11.2006 rendered in the Regular First Appeals of the applicants, which along with other connected appeals, were decided by a common order on the said date. The judgment dated 29.11.2006 was subsequently reviewed and modified by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.08.2008, whereby the market value of the acquired land was reassessed and fixed at ₹206/- per square yard. (cid:1)

2. The present review applicants seek further enhancement of compensation on the basis of parity with the landowners in whose favour the Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide judgment dated 26.02.2016 passed in Civil Appeal Nos. 1863-1865 of 2016 titled M/s Arti Spinning Mills etc. v. State of Haryana and another, enhanced the compensation to ₹16,08,000/- per acre, equivalent to ₹332.23 per square yard, though without statutory benefits for the period of delay.(cid:1)

3. Out of the twenty-four review applications, twenty-three are accompanied by separate applications seeking condonation of delay of 4825 days, whereas in one application the delay sought to be condoned is of 3774 days.(cid:1)

4. Following table will give the details of the RFAs of the as disposed of in the bunch on 29.11.2006 modified on 05.08.2008 in earlier review applications besides the review applications number and miscellaneous civil applications moved in separate review applications so as to condone the delay besides the period of delay:(cid:1)

(cid:1) (cid:1)

5. The substantive controversy arises out of the compulsory acquisition of 137.74 acres of land situated in the revenue estates of villages Mauja Maqdum Jagdan, Mauja Patti Taraf Insar, Sarai Bachhra, Azizullapur and Nizampur in District Panipat. Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 02.03.1993 for development and establishment of Sector-18, Panipat, followed by declaration under Section 6 dated 01.03.1994. The Land Acquisition Collector, vide award dated 28.02.1996, assessed the market value of the acquired lands differently depending upon the location and nature of the land. Dissatisfied landowners sought references under Section 18 of the Act. The Reference Court, relying upon the judgment of this Court in Jogi Ram v. State of Haryana, 1997 (2) PLR 303, and keeping in view the time gap between the notifications involved therein and the present acquisition, assessed the market value at ₹185.60 per square yard and granted all statutory benefits.(cid:1)

6. Appeals were thereafter filed by both the landowners and the State. A Coordinate Bench of this Court, in a bunch of appeals led by RFA No. 2600 of 2001 titled Bahadur Chand v. State of Haryana, decided on 29.11.2006, reassessed the market value at