IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)RFA No. 2537 of 1997 (O&M)

Date of decision: 30.10.2025 Gulab Singh (deceased) through LRs and others ...Appellants Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. Bhupinder Singh Bairagi, Advocate for the appellants.

Mr. Abhinash Jain, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for the respondents.

****

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

(cid:1)

CM-4341-CI-1997 Prayer in the present application, filed under Order 41 Rule 27 read with Section 151 of CPC, moved by the applicants- appellants/landowners, is for seeking permission to lead additional evidence in the shape of copy of letter/communication dated 19.09.1997 written/issued by the Executive Engineer, Karnal Provincial Division No. 1, PWD (B&R), Karnal, appended as Annexure A-1.

This Court, vide order dated 10.02.1998, admitted the main appeal while issuing notice of the instant application.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

The aforesaid letter dated 19.09.1997 has been sought to be produced by way of additional evidence so as to profess that the possession of land in question was taken over by the respondents in the year 1973 and thus they were entitled for interest on market value from the said date. However, a perusal of the reference petition filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 at the hands of appellants shows that no such pleadings were made therein. In the absence thereof, the applicants-appellants cannot be permitted to lead any evidence beyond their own pleadings.

Resultantly, the present application being devoid of merits is hereby dismissed MAIN CASE [1] By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to an award dated 26.07.1997 passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Karnal (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 appellants-landowners, was dismissed.

FACTS [2] Briefly stating, some land owned by the appellants- landowners, situated within the revenue estate of Village Har Singhpura, District Karnal, came to be acquired vide Notifications dated 02.02.1993 & 20.12.1993 issued under Sections 4 & 6 respectively of the 1894 Act, for the public purpose, namely, “construction of Panipat Barsat Road to Village Har Singhpura”. An Award No. 179/1996 under Section 11 of the 1894 Act was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector, Karnal (for short “LAC’), whereby the market value was assessed at Rs.1,30,000/- per acre for Chahi land besides awarding statutory benefits.

[3] Dissatisfied with the aforesaid Award, landowners / interested persons filed objections under Section 18 of the Act of 1894, which were dismissed on 26.07.1997 by the learned Reference Court, while affirming the award passed by the LAC. Hence, the present appeal.

CONTENTION(S):

ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT(S)-LANDOWNER(S)

[4] Learned counsel for the appellants submits that learned Reference Court went wrong while discarding the sale instance Ex. P- 1 dated 10.12.1992 which pertained to the same revenue estate of Village Har Singhpura, whereby 2 kanals of land for a sum of Rs.80,000/- was alienated and the market value per acre was Rs.3,20,000/-. He thus submits that in the wake of the aforesaid sale exemplar Ex. P-1, the market value was required to be enhanced.

Learned counsel also points out that as per the cross-

examination of RW-1 / Sh. Lakhi Ram. S.D.E. PWD (B&R), Karnal, the possession of the land in question was taken over by the respondents in the year 1991 and thus, the appellants was entitled for interest at the rate of 12% in terms of Section 23 (1-A) of the 1894 Act from the year 1991 till 02.02.1993 i.e. the date of notification issued under Section 4 of the Act in hand.

No other point has been raised.

ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT(S)-STATE OF HARYANA [5]