Punjab-Haryana High Court
Parkash Chand vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 24 November, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:150782
2023:PHHC:150782
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
102 CM No. 5257-CI-2023 in/and
RFA-3044-2010 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 24.11.2023
Parkash Chand
...Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present: Mr. P.R. Yadav, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Shivendra Swaroop, DAG, Haryana.
Ms. Vibha Nagar, Advocate for
Mr. Pritam Singh Saini, Advocate for HSIIDC.
Mr. Rajiv Kumar Saini, Advocate for
Mr. Bhim Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2.
****
HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral)
CM No. 5257-CI-2023
Prayer made in the present application moved on behalf of
the applicant-appellant is for fixing an actual date of hearing of the
main appeal.
Notice of the application.
Learned counsel(s) for the non-applicant(s) accept notice
and have no objection against the prayer made in the application.
In view of the above, present application is allowed and
the main appeal is taken on board today itself.
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:150782
102 RFA-3044-2010 (O&M)
MAIN APPEAL
1. By way of present appeal, challenge has been made to an
award dated 27.01.2010 passed by the Additional District Judge,
Gurgaon (now Gurugram), [hereinafter referred to as 'the Reference
Court] under Sections 18 and 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
(hereinafter referred to as '1894 Act'), in a reference petition filed at
the instance of the appellant-landowner, whereby the market value of
the land under acquisition was assessed @ Rs.28,15,849/- per acre,
besides other statutory benefits and also, holding respondent No.2
entitled to receive 1/9th share out of the enhanced compensation.
2. Vakaltnama filed on behalf of respondent No.2 in the
Court is taken on record.
3. Briefly stating, certain land owned by the appellant-
landowner, situated within the revenue estate of Village Kasan, Tehsil
and District Gurugram, came to be acquired vide Notifications issued
on 07.03.2022 and 25.11.2022 under Sections 4 and 6 of the 1894 Act,
respectively, for setting up of Industrial Model Township, Phase-III,
Manesar, Tehsil and District Gurugram, followed by an award dated
24.12.2003 passed by the Land Acquisition Collector, Gurgaon (for
short "LAC"), whereby compensation of Rs. 5,25,000/- for Chahi and
Rs. 7,50,000/- for Gair Mumkin land was assessed qua village Kasan.
4. Aggrieved thereof, the appellant invoked reference under
Sections 18 and 30 of the 1894 Act, seeking enhancement of
compensation, besides apportionment thereof as against respondent
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:150782
102 RFA-3044-2010 (O&M)
No.2. The Reference Court vide award dated 27.01.2010, assessed the
market value @ Rs.28,15,849/- per acre, besides other statutory
benefits in favour of landowners and also held respondent No.2 entitled
for 1/9th share out of the enhanced compensation.
5. Still aggrieved, the appellant filed the present appeal,
impugning the aforesaid award dated 27.01.2010. At the outset while
referring to paragraph 4 of CM No. 5257-CI-2023, which is supported
by an affidavit, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant does not intend to assail/challenge the findings recorded qua
apportionment of compensation, having accepted the same and wishes
to press the appeal only qua the relief of enhancement. In this regard,
he places reliance upon the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme in case of
'Wazir & Anr. Vs. State of Haryana' 2019(1) RCR (Civil) 702 and
'Hukam Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Haryana and Anr', 2019 (13)
SCC 123, whereby the compensation pertaining to same Notifications
issued on 07.03.2022 and 25.11.2022 under Sections 4 and 6 of the
1894 Act, respectively, relating to village Kasan, has already been
enhanced to Rs.39,54,666/- per acre, besides grant of all statutory
benefits.
6. In view of the stand taken by learned counsel for the
appellant as regards having accepted the findings qua apportionment as
recorded in the impugned award, learned counsel for respondent No.2
is not in a position to oppose the prayer made in the present appeal for
enhancement of compensation only.
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:150782
102 RFA-3044-2010 (O&M)
7. Similarly, learned State counsel and learned counsel for
respondent No.4, are also not in a position to dispute the factual aspect
of the matter as regards the compensation already having been finally
determined by the Hon'ble Apex Court pertaining to the same
Notifications issued on 07.03.2022 and 25.11.2022 under Sections 4
and 6 of 1894 Act, respectively, qua the land falling in the revenue
estate of Village Kasan, for setting up of Industrial Model Township,
Phase-III, Manesar, Tehsil and District Gurugram, @ Rs.39,54,666/-
per acre.
8. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone
through the record.
9. In view of the facts and discussion made hereinabove, the
present appeal is allowed in terms of decision of Hon'ble Supreme
Court in case of Hukam Singh (Supra) and the market value of the
acquired land is assessed @ Rs.39,54,666/- per acre besides all other
statutory benefits payable under the 1894 Act, subject to upholding the
findings recorded by the Reference Court as regards the apportionment
of compensation.
10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand(s) disposed of.
24.11.2023 (HARKESH MANUJA)
Mangal Singh JUDGE
Whether Speaking / Reasoned : Yes No
Whether Reportable : Yes No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:150782
4 of 4
