IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA-670-2000(O&M)

and other connected cases Decided on:-28.08.2025 State of Haryana and others ....Appellants..

vs.

Hazari and another ....Respondents.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana.

None for the respondents-landowners.

*****

HARKESH MANUJA J. (Oral)

1. Vide this common judgment, the batch of total 16 connected Regular First Appeals are being decided as all have arisen out of the same award. The details of the connected cases are given on the foot of the judgment.

1.2 For convenience, the facts are being taken from RFA-670-2000 (O&M).

2. By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to an award dated 19.08.1999 passed by the learned Reference Court-cum-Additional District Judge(I), Bhiwani, whereby, reference petition(s) preferred at the instance of appellants-landowners having invoked Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity, “1894 Act”), were partly allowed.

3. Brief facts of the case are that certain land owned by the appellants-landowners, situated in the revenue estate of Village Devsar, Tehsil Bhiwani, was acquired vide notifications dated 10.01.1993 and 06.01.1994, issued under Sections 4 & 6, respectively of the 1894 Act, for the public purpose, namely, construction of Dinod sub-minor. The total land under acquisition was 24.84 acres. The Land Acquisition Collector vide its award dated 05.01.1996 assessed the market value of the acquired land as follows:-

4. Aggrieved of the award passed by the Land Acquisition Collector, appellants-landowners along with others invoked separate reference petition(s) under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, seeking enhancement of compensation. Upon consideration of the material available on record, the Reference Court vide its award dated 19.08.1999, enhanced the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.85,000/- per acre for all types of land belonging to the landowners.

5. Feeling dissatisfied with the aforesaid award passed by the Reference Court, the appellants-State of Haryana have preferred the appeals, details whereof are mentioned in the foot of the judgment.

6. Impugning the aforesaid award dated 19.08.1999, learned counsel representing the appellants-State submits that the learned Reference Court went wrong while relying upon the sale deed dated 10.02.1994 (Ex.P1) produced on record by the respondents-landowners as the same was post notification under Section 4 and even, the locations of the sale deeds Ex.P-1 and Ex.P-2 were never proved on record by the respondents- landowners in comparison to the land under acquisition. He further submits that even the method adopted by the learned Reference Court for average of the sale instance was also incorrect.

6.1 Learned State counsel points out that the sale deeds Ex.R-2 to Ex.R-5, which were produced on record by the State of Haryana and were even depicted in the site plan Ex.R-1, reflected the true & correct market value of the land under acquisition and thus, the same were required to be taken into account. He also submits that as per Ex.R-2 to R-5, the maximum market value of the land under acquisition was around Rs.32,727.27 paise per acre and thus, the award passed by the Land Acquisition Collector called for no interference. Learned State counsel, thus, submits that the appeals filed at the instance of State of Haryana were required to be allowed as the market value assessed by the learned Reference Court at the rate of Rs.85,000/- per acre was without any basis. No other argument has been addressed.

7. No one has chosen to appear on behalf of the respondents- landowners despite the matter been adjourned for number of occasions awaiting their presence and as such appeals are being heard in their absenc