Landowners are entitled to compensation parity when the benchmark award relied upon by the Reference Court is subsequently enhanced by a higher court, including an appreciation rate for the time gap between the respective notifications.

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

1. Vide this common order, a batch of 5 appeals shall stand disposed of, details whereof are mentioned in the footnote of the judgment. For convenience, the facts are drawn from RFA-86-2000.

2. By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgment dated 04.10.1999 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘Reference Court), whereby the reference petition filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the appellant(s)-landowner(s), seeking enhancement of compensation was partly allowed.

3. Briefly stating, land measuring 0.35 acres, situated within the revenue estate of Village Dhanas, Dadu Majra and Maloya, Chandigarh was acquired for the public purpose for construction of 66 K.V. D/C Mohali-Chandigarh, Sector 12 line vide notifications dated 18.04.1994 and 17.01.1995 issued under Sections 4 and 6 respectively of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘LAC’) vide award dated 29.09.1997 assessed the market value at the rate of Rs.1,85,140/- per acre for village Maloya, Rs.2,04,880/- per acre for village Dadu Majra and Rs.1,13,333/- per acre for village Dhanas along with other statutory benefits under the Act.

4. The appellant(s)-landowner(s), feeling dissatisfied with the award, sought reference under Section 18 of the Act pleading that the price of acquired land was not less than Rs.5,00,000/- per acre.

5. Upon notice, the same was contested by the respondent-State by filing a written statement wherein it was contended that the market value assessed by the LAC was correct and thus, no interference was called for with the same.

6. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by learned Reference Court:-

“1. As to what was the market value at the time of notification under Section 4? OPP

2. Relief.”

7. After considering the evidence, the learned Reference Court, vide award dated 04.10.1999 enhanced the amount of compensation to Rs.4,84,000/- per acre.

8. Aggrieved of the aforesaid decision dated 04.10.1999 of the learned Reference Court, the appellant(s)-landowner(s) filed the present appeal(s).

9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book. I find substance in the submissions made on behalf of the appellant(s)-landowner(s).

10. In the present case, the acquisition in hand commenced vide notification dated 18.04.1994 issued under Section 4 of the Act followed by notification dated 17.01.1995 issued under Section 6 thereof. Award under Section 11 was passed by the LAC on 29.09.1997 and the acquisition was carried for the public purpose of construction of 66 K.V. D/C Mohali-Chandigarh, Sector 12 line. The total acquired was 0.35 acres falling in three revenue estates of villages Dhanas, Maloya and Dadu Majra, UT Chandigarh. A perusal of the record shows that the learned Reference Court placed reliance upon its previous judgment dated 06.12.1997 whereby, the market value for the revenue estate of village Kajheri, UT Chandigarh was assessed at Rs.4,35,600/- per acre in terms of notification dated 22.05.1992 issued under Section 4 of the Act.

Further the Learned Reference Court also recorded that the revenue estate of villages Kajheri, Maloya and Dadu Majra besides few other villages were to be treated on parity insofar their potentiality was concerned. Therefore, the learned Reference Court relying up