HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

Vide this common order, a batch of 3 Regular First Appeal(s) bearing RFA Nos. 207 of 2015, 67 and 68 of 2016 shall stand disposed of as the same involve common question of law and fact. For convenience, the facts are drawn from RFA-207-2015.

2. By way of present appeal(s), challenge has been laid to the judgment dated 29.05.2014 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Kaithal (hereinafter referred to as ‘Reference Court’) whereby the reference petition filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the appellants-landowners, seeking enhancement of compensation was partly allowed.

3. Briefly stating, certain land, situated within the revenue estate of Village Mal Kheri, H.B. No.9 Tehsil and District Kaithal, was acquired for the public purpose, namely, “for extension of Shergarh Guhna Link Channel” vide notifications dated 09.06.2010 and 28.12.2010 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘the LAC’) vide his Award dated 17.08.2011 assessed the market value of the acquired land @ Rs.12,00,000/- per acre along with other statutory benefits under the Act.

4. The appellant(s)-landowner(s), feeling dissatisfied with the award, sought reference under Section 18 of the Act pleading that the price of acquired land was not less than Rs.50,00,000/- per acre as the same was situated near the main road. Moreover, it was pleaded that the LAC had not considered the relevant sale deeds and mutations of acquired land while awarding the compensation.

5. Upon notice, the same was contested by the respondents-State by way of filing written statement wherein it was pleaded that the compensation of the acquired land was assessed as per the market value after considering all the facts necessary under the provision of law.

6. Upon framing of issues and after consideration of the evidences led by both the parties, the learned Reference Court, vide award dated 29.05.2014 enhanced the amount of compensation to Rs.23,23,200/- per acre.

7. Aggrieved of the aforesaid award dated 29.05.2014 passed by the learned Reference Court, the appellants-landowners filed the present appeal(s).

CONTENTION(S):

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

8. Impugning the aforementioned award, learned counsel for the appellant(s)-landowner(s) submits that the learned Reference Court erred having applied a deduction of almost 40% over the sale price per acre derived from the sale instance Ex.P1 vide which 4 kanals of land was sold for Rs. 19,36,000/- with the base price Rs.38,72,000/- per acre. Learned counsel thus contends that in the given facts and circumstances, when the total acquired land from the revenue estate of village Mal Kheri was merely 1.38 acres and the land parcel forming part of sale deed Ex.P1 was 4 kanals, no deduction was required to be applied towards smallness of area. As such, the market value was required to be re-assessed and enhanced accordingly in favour of the appellants/landowners and the appeal(s) preferred at the instance of the landowners were to be allowed.

ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT(S)-STATE OF HARYANA

9. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent(s)-State submits that the learned Reference Court erred having discarded the sale deeds Exs. R-2 and R-3 produced on record by the respondent(s)-State wherein the sale price reflected per acre for the revenue estates of village Mal kheri ranged from Rs.3 to 6 lakhs. He also contends that the sale deed produced by the appellants/landowners in the form of Ex.P-1 pertained to a different village, namely, Baba Ladana, whereas the acquisition in case(s) in hand was carried out from the revenue estates of village Mal kheri and as such the same was not to be relied upon. He thus submits that the appellants/landowners were already awarded sufficient market value at the rate of Rs. 12,00,000/- per acre by the LAC and thus, no further enhancement was requi