Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Haryana vs Daya Ram & Others on 5 July, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:091196
RFA-3478-1999 (O&M) --1--
213 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
RFA-3478-1999 (O&M)
Decided on:-05.07.2024
The State of Haryana thr. District Collector, Faridabad ....Appellant.
vs.
Daya Ram and others ....Respondents.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present: Mr. Shivendra Swaroop, DAG, Haryana,
for the respondent(s)-State.
None for the respondents.
*****
HARKESH MANUJA J. (Oral)
1. By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to an award
dated 10.11.1998 passed by the Reference Court-cum-Additional District
Judge, Faridabad, whereby reference petition filed at the instance of
respondents-landowners invoking Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894 (herein after called "1894 Act"), stands allowed.
2. Briefly stating, certain land owned by the respondents-
landowners, situated in the revenue estate of villages Bhanakpur and
Karnera, Tehsil Ballabgarh, District Faridabad, came to be acquired vide
notification dated 14.08.1991, issued under Section 4(1) of the 1894 Act, for
the construction of additional No.4 Bays at Samepur Sub-Station. The Land
Acquisition Collector, in exercise of its powers under Section 11 of the 1894
Act, awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.1,25,000/- per acre vide award
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:091196
RFA-3478-1999 (O&M) --2--
dated 26.02.1992.
3. Aggrieved of the award passed by the Land Acquisition
Collector, respondents-landowners invoked reference petition under Section
18 of the 1894 Act, seeking enhancement of compensation. Upon
consideration of the material available on record, the Reference Court vide
its award dated 10.11.1998 decided the reference petition with the final
observation as under:-
"In view of the finding recorded by me on the above issues,
particularly on issue No.1, I hereby accept this reference holding
that the market price of the acquired land on the date of
publication of notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was
Rs.153/- per square yard. The petitioners are also held entitled to
the other statutory benefits under Section 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 of
the Act. Memo of costs be prepared accordingly and file be
consigned to records."
4. By way of present appeal, the aforementioned award dated
10.11.1998 has been assailed at the instance of State against the
enhancement.
5. No one has chosen to appear on behalf of the respondents-
landowners.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and gone through
the paper book.
7. Perusal of the record shows that similar appeals filed at the
instance of respondent-State, challenging similar award passed by the
Reference Court pertaining to same acquisition proceeding stood dismissed
by this Court vide its judgment dated 23.01.2014 passed in RFA-1924-1996
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:091196
RFA-3478-1999 (O&M) --3--
(O&M) (and other connected cases), titled as "State of Haryana and
another vs. Kalyan Singh and another". Moreover, even the SLP
No.17329-2014 filed against the decision dated 23.01.2014, stood dismissed
by the Hon'ble Apex Court, thereby resulting into finality of the assessment
of compensation made by the Reference Court in its award dated
10.11.1998.
8. Accordingly, in view of the discussion made herein-above, the
present appeal being devoid of merits, is dismissed.
9. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
05.07.2024 (HARKESH MANUJA)
sonika JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/ No
3 of 3
