##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

I. RFA-1020-2023 (O&M) State of Haryana and Others . . . . Appellants

Vs.

Mahender Singh and Others . . . . Respondents

II. RFA-978-2023 (O&M) Mahender Singh and Others . . . . Appellants

Vs.

State of Haryana and Others . . . . Respondents

****

Reserved on: 02.04.2026 Pronounced on: 06.04.2026

Pronounced fully/opera9ve part: Fully ****

CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Argued by:- Mr. Gaurav Garg, AAG, Haryana for the

appellant in RFA-1020-2023, and for the respondent in RFA-978-2023.

Mr. Adarsh Jain, Senior Advocate with Ms. Amandeep Kaur, Advocate and

Ms. Kamaldeep Kaur, Advocate for the appellant in RFA-978-2023, and for the

respondent in RFA-1020-2023.

DEEPAK GUPTA, J.

These cross-appeals arise out of the award dated 02.02.2023 passed by the learned Addi-onal District Judge, Panipat, whereby the reference filed under Sec-on 18 of the Land Acquisi-on Act, 1894 was partly allowed and the compensa-on awarded by the Land Acquisi-on Collector was enhanced from ₹42,00,000/- per acre to ₹75,00,000/- per acre along with all statutory

NEETIKA TUTEJA 2026.04.06 17:28 I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

RFA-1020-2023 (O&M)

RFA-978-2023 (O&M)

benefits.

2. The land in ques-on was acquired pursuant to no-fica-on dated 20.10.2011 issued under Sec-on 4 of the Act for the public purpose of se8ng up/expansion of a Sewerage Treatment Plant at Panipat. The Land Acquisi-on Collector had assessed the market value of the acquired land at ₹42,00,000/- per acre. Dissa-sfied therewith, the landowners sought a reference claiming that the acquired land was situated within the urban limits of Panipat, pos- sessed considerable commercial, industrial and residen-al poten-al, and had

been grossly undervalued.

3. The Reference Court, upon apprecia-on of the material placed on record, enhanced the compensa-on to ₹75,00,000/- per acre.

4. Aggrieved by the said determina-on, both sides are before this Court. The landowners seek further enhancement on the ground that the Refer- ence Court failed to adequately appreciate the poten-ality and advantageous loca-on of the land, whereas the State seeks reduc-on contending that the Ref- erence Court has erred in law in relying upon Collector rates as the primary ba-

sis for determining market value.

5. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the landowners has contended that the acquired land formed part of the rapidly developing urban area of Panipat and was surrounded by residen-al, commercial and industrial establishments. It is submied that the Collector rates relied upon by the Refer- ence Court themselves do not reflect the true market value and are generally on the lower side, as sale transac-ons are o>en under-reported to avoid stamp duty. It is thus argued that the compensa-on ought to have been assessed at a

much higher rate.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State has argued that the Ref- erence Court has commied a patent error in law in determining the market value solely on the basis of Collector rates. Reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited v.

Page 2 of 6 NEETIKA TUTEJA 2026.04.06 17:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

RFA-1020-2023 (O&M)

RFA-978-2023 (O&M)

M/s Nemichand Damodardas and anr. 2022 (14) SCC 60, to contend that ready reckoner or circle rates, being meant for the purpose of levy of stamp duty, have no statutory founda-on for determina-on of compensa-on under Sec-on 23 of the Land Acquisi-on Act, 1894 and cannot form the basis for enhancement. It is further contended that the claimants having failed to produce any reliable sale exemplar of comparable land, the burden cast upon them has not been dis- charged and the award of the Land Acquisi-on Collector deserves to be re-

stored.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the par-es and having gone through the record with their assistance, this Court finds that the determina-o