136 (22 cases)

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

RFA-2968-2010 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 14.01.2026 Ram Mehar and others …….Appellants Versus State of Haryana and anr. ..….Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr.S.K. Verma, Advocate Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate Mr. Som Nath Saini, Advocate for the appellants/landowners.

Mr.Abhinash Jain, DAG Haryana.

-.-

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

Vide this common order, a bunch of 22 Regular First Appeals, details of which are given in the footnote of this judgment, are being decided as all the appeals have arisen out of common acquisition/Award involving common facts and question of law. For the sake of brevity, facts are being taken from RFA No.2968-2010.

2. By way of filing the present appeal(s) challenge has been laid to the decision dated 11.01.2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jind-cum-Reference Court, seeking further enhancement of the compensation.

3. Briefly stating, some land, situated within the revenue estate of Villages Brah Khurd and Radhana, was sought to be acquired by the Government of Haryana vide notifications dated 21.06.2006 and 04.12.2006, issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short ‘the Act’ respectively, for public purpose i.e. for “Sewerage Treatment Plant”. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘the LAC’) vide award 17.01.2007 assessed market value in respect of the acquired land @ Rs.5,00,000/- per acre, besides compensation for building structures and tubewell etc. to the tune of Rs.16829/- and for trees to the tune of Rs.24535 along with all other statutory benefits under the Act.

4. Dissatisfied with the aforesaid award, the appellants/ landowners filed reference petitions invoking Section 18 of the Act, which came to be disposed of by the learned Reference Court vide decision dated 11.01.2010 while determining the market value of the acquired land @ Rs.7,50,000/- per acre besides all other statutory benefits under the Act.

5. Aggrieved of the Award passed by the learned Reference Court, the present appeals were preferred at the instance of appellants/ landowners as well as respondent State.

6. Impugning the aforementioned award, learned counsels for the appellants/ landowners submit that the learned Reference Court went wrong having ignored the agreement to sell dated 29.12.2006 (Ex.P1) vide which 4K-14M of land forming part of revenue estate of Village Bara Khurd was sold @ Rs.18.60 lakhs per acre. It has thus been submitted that the market value was required to be enhanced while taking into account the agreement to sell Ex.P1, besides considering the location of the acquired land which was situated on the State Highway leading from Jind to Gohana. Learned counsels also point out that the acquired land fell within ½ km from the municipal limits and 3-4 kms from Bus Stand, Jind and as such keeping in view the location of the land, the amount of compensation was required to be enhanced.

7. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent State submits that for the purpose of determination of market value, the agreement to sell could not be taken into account and thus was rightly declined by the learned Reference Court. Learned counsel also points out that in the absence of any material evidence available on record, the learned Reference Court went wrong having enhanced the market value of the acquired land from Rs.5 lakhs per acre to Rs.7.50 lakhs per acre and as such the award passed by the learned Reference Court was liable to be set aside and the determination made by the LAC was required to be restored.

8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book.

9. A perusal of the record shows that as per the agreement to sell dated 29.12.2006 (Ex.P1) vide which 4K-14M of land forming part of the revenue estate of Village Brah Khurd was agreed to be sold @ Rs.18.60 lakhs per acre; however, later sale deed vide Vasika No.2644 da