IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 17.09.2025 Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran, Gurugram ...Appellant Versus Shyam Kumari and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. Shivendra Swaroop, Advocate and Mr. Siddhanth Arora, Advocate for Mr. Ankur Mittal, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Keshav Pratap Singh, Advocate and Mr. Sanskar Dhanda, Advocate for contesting respondent No. 1-landowner (Shyam Kumari)

Mr. Abhinash Jain, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for pro forma respondent Nos. 2 & 3.

****

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

CM-3170-CI-2022 Prayer in the present application, filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC, moved by the applicant-appellant/HSVP, is for seeking permission to lead additional evidence in the shape of copy of CWP No. 4753 of 2013, annexed with the paper-book as Annexure A-

1.

This Court, vide order dated 09.11.2022, admitted the main appeal while passing orders to hear the instant application with the main case.

Notice of the application.

Learned counsel for the non-applicant/respondent No. 1 accepts notice and does not oppose the prayer made in the application.

Learned counsel for the parties have been heard.

A copy of the CWP-4753-2013 is necessary for adjudication of the appeal in hand as the same would help even this Court to adjudicate the rights of the parties; finally and conclusively. There being no dispute raised at the instance of non- applicant/respondent No. 1 about the veracity and contents of the copy of the aforesaid writ petition, especially when the document forms part of the judicial record and no objection has been raised as to their admissibility or the mode of proof at the instance of non-

applicant/respondent No. 1-landowner.

In view thereof, the prayer made in the application is allowed and the copy of aforesaid writ petition is taken on record as Annexure A-1.

Instant application is disposed off MAIN CASE [1] By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to an award dated 01.10.2019 passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Gurugram (hereinafter referred to as “Reference Court”), whereby a reference petition filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘1894 Act’)

preferred at the instance of respondent No.1-landowner, was allowed.

FACTS [2] Briefly stating, some land owned by respondent No.1- landowner, situated within the revenue estate of Village Choma, Tehsil and District Gurugram came to be acquired vide Notifications dated 25.01.2008 and 18.03.2008 issued under Section 4 read with Section 17(1) and Section 6 respectively of the 1894 Act, for the public purpose, namely, “development and utilisation of land for 150 Mtr. Periphery Road linking Dwarika Township Delhi from Haryana Boundary to NH-8, near Village Kherki Daula at Gurugram.” An Award under Section 11 of 1894 Act was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector, Gurugram (for short “LAC’) on 23.12.2009, whereby the market value was assessed at Rs.60,00,000/- per acre.

[3] Aggrieved thereof, respondent No.1-landowner (Shyam Kumari) filed reference under Section 18 of the 1894 Act on 12.11.2013 for the purpose of seeking enhancement of market value. The aforesaid reference was opposed at the instance of the appellant-

HSVP, being barred by limitation.

[4] Learned Reference Court, vide its award dated 01.10.2019, allowed the reference petition filed at the instance of respondent No.1- landowner on merits, while holding it to be within limitation. Respondent No.1-landowner was as such awarded the benefit of market value of Rs.4,06,34,750/- besides grant of other statutory benefits in view of the market value determined by the Hon’ble Apex Court vide order dated 05.09.2017 passed in Civil Appeal Nos. 11814-11864 of 2017, titled “State of Haryana & Ors. Versus Ram Chander and Anr.”. The aforementioned award dated 01.10.2019 passed by the Reference Court has been impugned by the appellant in the present appeal.

CONTENTION(S) ON B