1. Factual Background
1.1 With the consent of learned counsel representing the parties, a
batch of around 484 regular first appeals, the detail whereof is given at the
foot of the judgment, shall stand disposed of by a common order.
1.2 These cross appeals have been filed by the landowners as well as the
Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as
"GMADA"), the beneficiary of the acquisition. The assessment of the
market value of the acquired land is the only issue arising in all these
1.3 The relevant and necessary details of the acquisition are as
S.No. Date Particulars Details
1. 23.01.2004 Notification under Section Proposing to acquire the land for
4 of the Land Acquisition planned development and for
Act, 1894 (hereinafter setting up of the residential Urban
referred to as "the 1894 Estate, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali,
Act") was published for which is now a district. The details
proposing of the land sought to be acquired
in the following five villages is as
under:-
3. Reasons recorded by the Reference Court
3.1 In batch No.1, the RC made the observations that all the
exemplar sale deeds produced by the landowners are post the date of
notification u/s 4 dated 23.01.2004. The sale deeds produced by the
GMADA i.e. sale deeds No. 2839, 2873, 2122, 3021, 2039, 2157, 644, 1345,
1835, 849, 288, 2506 and 839 have been excluded from consideration on the
ground that the price reflected in these sale deeds is lower than the amount
awarded by the LAC. The RC has also declined to rely upon the LAC's
awards announced on 15.11.2011 offering to pay @ ₹1,08,45,070/- per acre
for the acquired land in villages Sohana, Lakhnaur, Behrampur, Manak
Majra and Landran. Thereafter, the RC calculated the average price reflected
in the sale deeds No. 2621 dated 23.11.2006, No. 2869 dated 19.12.2006,
No. 2854 dated 18.12.2006 and No. 2620 dated 23.11.2006 @
₹1,07,88,368/-. The RC after noticing that the sale instances are post
23.01.2004, decided to roll back the price @ 12% per annum. After
deducting 34% of ₹1,07,88,368/-, the RC arrived at the figure of
₹71,20,318/-. Thereafter, chose to apply 25% cut towards the development
charges and assessed the market value of the acquired land in village Chilla
@ ₹53,39,639/- per acre.
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 9
Other Connected Cases
3.2 The RC assessed the market value of the land located in village
Mauli Baidwan @ ₹71,40,000/- per acre. For the above noted reasons, the
RC did not rely upon the LAC vide awards No.522, 523, 524, 525 and 526
offering to pay @ ₹1,08,45,070/- per acre to the landowners for acquisition
of land located in villages Sohana, Lakhnaur, Behrampur, Manak Majra and
Landran by different notifications. It was also noticed that all the sale deeds
produced by the landowners are post 23.01.2004. The RC excluded three
sale deeds produced by GMADA from consideration for assessing the
market value on the ground that the aforesaid sale deeds reflect the price
lower than ₹40,00,000/- per acre. Subsequently, the RC selected the post
23.01.2004 sale deed number 1985 dated 20.09.2006 with respect to the
land measuring 12 kanals 15 marlas sold @ ₹1,40,00,000/-. After applying
deduction @ 32% i.e. @ 12% per annum @ ₹1,40,00,000/- it arrived at a
figure of ₹95,00,000/-. Thereafter, towards development charges 25% cut
was further applied to arrive at a figure of ₹71,40,000/-.
3.3 In the reference petitions arising from the acquisition of land in
village Raipur Khurd, the RC vide judgment dated 16.04.2013 assessed the
market value of the acquired land @ ₹53,39,634/- per acre. The RC took
note of the fact that all the exemplar sale deeds produced by the landowners
are post 23.01.2004, whereas the sale deeds produced by the beneficiary of
acquisition reflect the price lower than ₹40,00,000/- per acre. Thereafter, the
Court relied upon the award passed on 11.12.2012 with respect to the
acquisition of the land in village Chilla to assess the market value of the
acquired land @ ₹53,39,639/- per acre.
With respect to the acquired land in village Kumbra, the RC,
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 10
Other Connected Cases
vide award dated 26.03.2013 assessed the market value of acquired land @
₹71,40,000/- per acre, at par with market value of the acquired land in
village Mauli Baidwan. The sale deed No. 639, dated 24.05.2004 produced
in evidence by GMADA with respect to the land measuring 8 kanalas 8
marlas located in village Kumbra was excluded from consideration on the
ground that it reflects the price lower than the amount awarded by the LAC.
4. Arguments put forth by the learned counsel representing
the parties
4.1 Heard the learned counsel representing the parties, at length and
with their able assistance, perused the paper-books along with the record of
the RC.
4.2 Mr. Shailendra Jain, Senior Advocate, has filed a written
synopsis wherein he has culled out his submission. The same is extracted as
under:-
"1. The land in question is admittedly urban property,
adjoins sector 67, 68, Phase XI, XII and main industrial
area of SAS Nagar. Furthermore, it adjoins main bus
stand, cricket stadium, and main GT Road running from
Chandigarh to Sirhind and also the GT Road passing
through Sectors 67, 68, 69, 70, 71 of SAS Nagar. The
land in question is near to Chandigarh International
Airport.
2. Award No.522 (Ex.CX) (Sohana), Award No.523
(Lakhnaur), Award No.524 (Bairampur), Award No.525
(Manak Majra) and Award No.526 (Landran) dated
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 11
Other Connected Cases
15.11.2011 for total area 888.49 Acres acquired for the
public purpose of setting up of residential and urban
estate in Sectors 88-89, are the most important pieces of
evidence, wherein the Collector has awarded a sum of
Rs.1,08,45,070/- per acre for notification u/s 4 dated
19.01.2004 and after adding statutory benefits, the total
compensation per acre comes to Rs.1,63.38,915/-.
3. As per the statement of Sh. Gurwinder Singh, Patwari
RW1 in Reference No. 1 of 2010 (Rajender Kaur V/s
State of Punjab), there is no difference in the quality and
value of the lands of the two awards. Any other approach
in payment of compensation in the case of present award
No.496 would vis por tantamount in depriving a
person/claimant of his property without authority of law
and would be hit by the provisions of Article 300A of the
Constitution of India. It is a settled law that lands of the
villages adjoining each other are assessed at a uniform
rate as held in State of Punjab V/s Harchal Singh: AIR
2006 Supreme Court 2122. All the villages' lands falls in
contiguity under the same Master Plan of SAS Nagar
Mohali and were required contemporaneously with a
difference of three days in the dates of notifications.
Parity in award of compensation was also the sole
objective behind enactment of Section 28A of the Land
Acquisition Act.
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 12
Other Connected Cases
4. Moreover, the same RC vide its Award, w.r.t. same date of
acquisition, qua village Mauli Baidwan, awarded
Rs.71,40,000/- per acre. It is well settled especially w.r.t.
villages falling near Mohali that property is of same
value and furthermore, once the LAC has awarded
compensation to all villages at par, they are entitled to
uniform rate on the basis of parity as well.
5. With regards to the superstructures and trees, claimants
have produced voluminous evidence and also got
examined PW/5 Amar Singh, the Draftsman. The
claimants pray for the indulgence of this court and make
appropriate enhancement in the compensation.
6. The evidence lead by the State of Punjab of the sale
deeds executed prior to the date of notification u/s 4 are
of lesser amount than the amount awarded by the
Collector as compensation of Rs.40 Lakhs. Such
transactions are undervalued as held by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in HSIDC V/s Pran Sukh & another
(Law Finder ID 237476), Shubh Ram & Another V/s
State of Haryana (Law Finder ID 459480). The
statement of Ashok Kumar, Kanugo, O/o LAC,
Department of Urban Development, Punjab (Ex.RW2)
and statement of Gurvinder Singh, Patwari, RW1 in
Reference No.1 of 2010 (Rajender Kaur V/s State of
2025.03.18 17:02 Punjab), where categorically stated that farmers always
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 13
Other Connected Cases
get the sale deed registered at the lower price than the
rate at which they purchase the land in order to save the
stamp duty, can be cited for this purpose."
4.3 Mr. Naresh Kaushal, Advocate, has also submitted the
following written submissions:-
"i. Firstly once the average of Ex.P-1 to P-6 has been taken
and decrease on the amount work out is applied thereby
reducing value to be from Rs. 1.40 Crore to Rs.
95,20,000/-, further cut of 25% was not warranted.
ii. Secondly as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Horrmal (deceased)
through his LR and others Versus State of Haryana and
others, SLP (C) No. 7963 of 2023 decided on
21.01.2024, land loosers are entitled to compensation on
the basis of sale instance reflecting the higher value
amongst various sale instances and that being so, sale
instance in the case in hand EX P-6 relating to area
measuring 26 Kanal 12 Marla of dated 11.07.2006 of
village Daon sold for Rs. 19,30,25,000/-and per acre
value comes to Rs. 5,80,52,631/- per acre. Further Ex. P-
5 reflect value to be Rs. 3,41,30,769/- per acre and Ex.P-
1 qua land of village Mauli Baidan measuring 30 Kanal
3 Marla sold for consideration of Rs. 5,84,15,625/- and
per acre rate comes to Rs. 1.55 Crore.
iii. Admittedly the bonafide of these sale instances Ex.P-1 to
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 14
Other Connected Cases
P-6 has not been doubted and it is proved on record of
the case that the same being bonafide reflect correct
value and the Hon'ble Apex Court in the above said latest
judgment has also held that post notification sales can
only be considered when better evidence is not available
on record.
iv. As per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court
recently in the above said case as well as in earlier cases
Section 23 mandates the market rate to be awarded as
prevalent on the date of notification u/s 4, it never talks
about the sale instances of prior thereto or post dated
rather the same is interpretation by the Hon'ble Judicial
Courts, all factors which includes, kind of land, potential
of land, potentiality in future, surrounding all over
development, price a willing buyer wants to pay and
willing seller wants to get, are to be considered and
further the post dated sale instances can be considered
when better evidence is not available on record and the
transactions are genuine and bonafide one."
4.4 The learned counsel representing the remaining respondents
have adopted the above noted arguments.
4.5 Mr. Rupinder Khosla, Senior Advocate, representing the
GMADA, drew the attention of the Court to LAC's award No. 522
announced on 15.11.2011, related to the acquired land located in village
2025.03.18 17:02 Sohana. He contended that the LAC has erred in assessing the market value
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 15
Other Connected Cases
of the acquired land on the date of award i.e. 15.11.2011. He submitted that
in all the batches, the RCs erred in calculating the average price of the
various sale deeds which were executed post 23.01.2004 and thereafter,
reduced the price @ 12% per annum while incorrectly excluding the sale
deeds produced by the GMADA from consideration.
5. Analysis and Discussion by this Court
5.1 The first submission made by Mr. Shailender Jain, Senior
Advocate, is based upon the current situation of the acquired land. As per
first part of Section 23(1) of the 1894 Act, the market value of the acquired
land is required to be assessed on 23.01.2004. At the time of notification,
neither the international airport was planned nor the area was developed.
5.2 It is important to note that the LAC while announcing the
awards No. 522, 523, 524, 525 and 526 (villages Sohana, Khanaur,
Behrampur, Manam Majra and Landran) has committed fundamental error in
assessing the market value of the acquired land on the date of award, i.e.
15.11.2011 and not on the date of Section 4 notification (19.01.2004) as
provided in the first part of Section 23(1). A decision was taken by the
Council of Ministers of Punjab Government in this respect in the peculiar
facts of the case. Hence, these awards are in violation of the first part of
Section 23(1) of the 1894 Act, which reads as under:-
"23. Matters to be considered on determining compensation. -
(1) In determining the amount of compensation to be
awarded for land acquired under this Act, the Court shall take
into consideration
first, the market-value of the land at the date of the publication
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 16
Other Connected Cases
of the notification under section 4, sub-section (1)."
5.3 The awards which are against the mandate of the Statute would
not serve as a good exemplar for assessing the market value of the acquired
land as on 23.01.2004. Moreover, these awards are with respect to the
acquisition of land by different notifications. The acquired land is also
located in different villages.
5.4 It would be noticed here that the oral evidence of Patwari would
not be sufficient to assess the market value of the acquired land. Similarly,
the reliance placed on Section 28A of the 1894 Act to claim parity with the
acquired land under different notification(s) is not made out because Section
28A provides another opportunity to the landowners who failed to apply
under Section 18. Section 28A does not provide for parity of compensation
under different notifications but only provides chance to the landowners who
could not apply earlier. The judgment passed in The State of Punjab v.
Harchal Singh (Dead) through LRs AIR 2006 Supreme Court 2122 is not
applicable to the facts of the present case.
5.5 The next submission of the learned counsel is based upon the
market value assessed of acquired land located in village Mauli Baidwan
which shall be examined in the later part of the judgment.
5.6 With respect to the fifth submission, this Court is not deciding
the cases involving the compensation for super structures and trees, hence, it
does not need any discussion.
5.7 The sixth submission put forth by the learned counsel also lacks
substance because the landowners have failed to lead cogent evidence to
2025.03.18 17:02 prove that the sale deeds produced by the GMADA were undervalued.
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 17
Other Connected Cases
5.8 The first and second submissions of Mr. Naresh Kaushal,
Advocate, shall be analyzed at a later stage. With regard to the third
submission, it would be noticed that the sale instances No. 855 dated
12.06.2006, No. 856 dated 12.06.2006, No. 1985 dated 20.09.2006, No.
6665 dated 31.03.2006, No. 154 dated 10.04.2008 and 1240 dated
11.07.2006 produced in village Mauli Baidwan, are all post 23.01.2004 sale
deeds. Hence, these can be relied upon only if there is no other sale deed of
contemporaneous period to 23.01.2004. In this case, the GMADA has
produced the sale deeds to prove the market value during the
contemporaneous period.
5.9 With regard to the fourth submission, the market value of the
acquired land is required to be assessed after taking a holistic view of the
matter. In fact, the Supreme Court in Chimanlal Hargovinddass Vs. Special
Land Acquisition Officer, Poona, (1988) 3 SCC 751 has laid down the
following 17 tests for assessing the market value of the acquired land:-
"4. The following factors must be etched on the mental
screen:
(1) A reference under Section 18 of the Land
Acquisition Act is not an appeal against the award and
the court cannot take into account the material relied
upon by the Land Acquisition Officer in his award unless
the same material is produced and proved before the
court.
(2) So also the award of the Land Acquisition Officer
is not to be treated as a judgment of the trial court open
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 18
Other Connected Cases
or exposed to challenge before the court hearing the
reference. It is merely an offer made by the Land
Acquisition Officer and the material utilised by him for
making his valuation cannot be utilised by the court
unless produced and proved before it. It is not the
function of the court to sit in appeal against the award,
approve or disapprove its reasoning, or correct its error
or affirm, modify or reverse the conclusion reached by the
Land Acquisition Officer, as if it were an appellate court.
(3) The court has to treat the reference as an original
proceeding before it and determine the market value
afresh on the basis of the material produced before it.
(4) The claimant is in the position of a plaintiff who
has to show that the price offered for his land in the
award is inadequate on the basis of the materials
produced in the court. Of course the materials placed and
proved by the other side can also be taken into account
for this purpose.
(5) The market value of land under acquisition has to
be determined as on the crucial date of publication of the
notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act
(dates of notifications under Sections 6 and 9 are
irrelevant).
(6) The determination has to be made standing on the
2025.03.18 17:02 date line of valuation (date of publication of notification
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 19
Other Connected Cases
under Section 4) as if the valuer is a hypothetical
purchaser willing to purchase land from the open market
and is prepared to pay a reasonable price as on that day.
It has also to be assumed that the vendor is willing to sell
the land at a reasonable price.
(7) In doing so by the instances method, the court
has to correlate the market value reflected in the most
comparable instance which provides the index of market
value.
(8) Only genuine instances have to be taken into
account. (Sometimes instances are rigged up in
anticipation of acquisition of land.)
(9) Even post-notification instances can be taken into
account (1) if they are very proximate, (2) genuine and
(3) the acquisition itself has not motivated the purchaser
to pay a higher price on account of the resultant
improvement in development prospects.
(10) The most comparable instances out of the
genuine instances have to be identified on the following
considerations:
(i) proximity from time angle,
(ii) proximity from situation angle.
(11) Having identified the instances which provide the
index of market value the price reflected therein may be
taken as the norm and the market value of the land under
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 20
Other Connected Cases
acquisition may be deduced by making suitable
adjustments for the plus and minus factors vis-à-vis land
under acquisition by placing the two in juxtaposition.
(12) A balance-sheet of plus and minus factors may be
drawn for this purpose and the relevant factors may be
evaluated in terms of price variation as a prudent
purchaser would do.
(13) The market value of the land under acquisition has
thereafter to be deduced by loading the price reflected in
the instance taken as norm for plus factors and unloading
it for minus factors.
(14) The exercise indicated in clauses (11) to (13) has
to be undertaken in a common sense manner as a prudent
man of the world of business would do. We may illustrate
some such illustrative (not exhaustive) factors:
Plus factors Minus factors
1 smallness of size 1 largeness of area
2 proximity to a road 2 situation in the interior at a
distance from the road
3 frontage on a road 3 narrow strip of land with very
small frontage compared to
depth
4 nearness to developed 4 lower level requiring the
area depressed portion to be filled up
5 regular shape 5 remoteness from developed
locality
6 level vis-à-vis land 6 some special disadvantageous
under acquisition factor which would deter a
purchaser
7 special value for an
owner of an adjoining
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 21
Other Connected Cases
property to whom it
may have some very
special advantage
(15) The evaluation of these factors of course depends
on the facts of each case. There cannot be any hard and
fast or rigid rule. Common sense is the best and most
reliable guide. For instance, take the factor regarding
the size. A building plot of land say 500 to 1000 sq. yds.
cannot be compared with a large tract or block of land
of say 10,000 sq. yds. or more. Firstly while a smaller
plot is within the reach of many, a large block of land
will have to be developed by preparing a lay out, carving
out roads, leaving open space, plotting out smaller plots,
waiting for purchasers (meanwhile the invested money
will be blocked up) and the hazards of an entrepreneur.
The factor can be discounted by making a deduction by
way of an allowance at an appropriate rate ranging
approximately between 20 per cent to 50 per cent to
account for land required to be set apart for carving out
lands and plotting out small plots. The discounting will
to some extent also depend on whether it is a rural area
or urban area, whether building activity is picking up,
and whether waiting period during which the capital of
the entrepreneur would be locked up, will be longer or
shorter and the attendant hazards.
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 22
Other Connected Cases
(16) Every case must be dealt with on its own fact
pattern bearing in mind all these factors as a prudent
purchaser of land in which position the judge must place
himself.
(17) These are general guidelines to be applied with
understanding informed with common sense."
5.10 A perusal of the layout plan produced by the parties depicts that
a compact block of land out of the aforesaid four villages was acquired.
Hence, in the absence of evidence to prove that the price of the acquired land
was different in all the villages (namely Mauli Baidwan, Raipur Khurd,
Chilla and Kumbra), the RC erred in assessing the separate market value of
those villages.
5.11 At this stage, the tabulated compilation of the sale deeds
produced by all the parties is extracted as under:-
Sr. Sale deed Sale Per Acre Area sold Location/Purpose
No. No. and Consideration Price (In ₹ )
Date (In ₹ )
Sale Deeds Produced by the Landowners
1. 5979/ 3,65,52,082/- 1,21,08,350/- 24 Kanals Patti Sohana/
27.02.2006 3 Marlas Agricultural
2. 5966/ 1,79,98,750/- 1,21,00,000/- 11 Kanals Patti
27.02.2006 18 Marlas Sohana/Barani
3. 1985/ 2,23,12,500/- 1,40,00,000/- 12 Kanals Mauli Baidwan/
20.09.2006 15 Marlas Chahi
4. 1515/ 7,03,00,000/- 1,60,00,000/- 35 Kanals Sukhgarh/Chahi
07.08.2006 3 Marlas
5. 3058/ 2,17,81,250/- 1,70,00,000/- 10Kanals Sukhgarh/Chahi
19.11.2008 5 Marlas
6. 2375/ 4,29,00,000/- 1,60,00,000/- 21 Kanals Dhurali/Chahi
02.11.2006 9 Marlas
7. 1645/ 5,66,31,250/- 1,70,00,000/- 26 Kanals Dhurali/Chahi
05.08.2008 13 Marlas
8. 1240/ 19,30,25,000/- 5,80,52,631/- 26 Kanals Bullo Majra/Chahi
11.07.2006 12 Marlas
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 23
Other Connected Cases
Sr. Sale deed Sale Per Acre Area sold Location/Purpose
No. No. and Consideration Price (In ₹ )
Date (In ₹ )
9. 6665/ 8,82,61,875/- 1,53,00,000/- 46 Kanals Dhol/Chahi
31.03.2006 3 Marlas
10. 1162/ 56,66,640/- 1,35,99,936/- 2 Bighas Raipur Khurd/
05.07.2007 0 Biswas Chahi
11. 3369/ 39,48,960/- 1,70,00,011/- 1 Bigha Raipur Khurd/
15.12.2008 2 Biswas Chahi
6 Biswansi
12. 2621/ 8,34,26,558/- 1,06,99,999/- 37 Bighas Chilla/Chahi
23.11.2006 8½ Biswas
13. 2869/ 7,81,32,288/- 1,06,99,999/- 35 Bighas Chilla/Chahi
19.12.2006 1 Biswa
14. 2854/ 3,57,78,124/- 1,06,99,999/- 16 Bighas Chilla/Chahi
18.12.2006 1 Biswas
15. 2620/ 2,01,73,957/- 1,06,99,999/- 9 Bighas Chilla/Chahi
23.11.2006 1 Biswas
16. 154/ 2,77,31,250/- 3,39,27,783/- 6 Kanals Bakarpur/Chahi
10.04.2008 10 Marlas
7 Sarsahi
17. 3580/ 3,33,59,375/- 2,50,00,000/- 10 Kanals Bairampur/Chahi
01.03.2007 13½ Marlas
18. 855/ 5,84,15,625/- 1,55,00,000/- 30 Kanals Mauli Baidwan/
12.06.2006 3 Marlas Chahi
19. 856/ 84,28,125/- 1,55,00,000/- 4 Kanals Mauli Baidwan/
12.06.2006 7 Marlas Chahi
Sale Deed Produced by GMADA
1. 2839/ 7,20,000/- 4,32,000/- 8 Bighas Chilla/Abi
27.02.2003 0 Biswas
2. 2873/ 5,49,000/- 4,32,000/- 6 Bighas Chilla/Chahi
08.01.2004 2 Biswas
3. 2122/ 1,00,000/- 4,00,000/- 1 Bigha Chilla/Abi
03.02.2003 4 Biswas
4. 3021/ 2,85,000/- 4,34,285/- 3 Bighas Chilla/Chahi
20.01.2004 3 Biswas
5. 2039/ 2,16,000/- 4,32,000/- 2 Bighas Chilla/Chahi
20.10.2003 8 Biswas
6. 2157/ 9,40,000/- 5,01,333/- 9 Bighas Raipur Khurd/
05.02.2003 0 Biswas Chahi
7. 644/ 7,30,000/- 5,00,571/- 7 Bighas Raipur Khurd/
05.06.2003 0 Biswas Chahi
8. 1345/ 5,25,000/- 5,04,000/- 5 Bighas Raipur Khurd/
07.08.2003 0 Biswas Chahi
9. 1835/ 39,80,000/- 5,00,105/- 38 Bighas Raipur Khurd/
19.09.2003 4 Biswas Chahi
10. 849/ 2,20,000/- 16,00,000/- 1 Kanal Mauli Baidwan/
01.08.2001 2 Marlas Gair Mumkin
11. 288/ 2,95,000/- 3,93,333/- 6 Kanals Mauli Baidwan/
20.05.2022 0 Marlas Barani
DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 12. 2506/ 3,00,000/- 4,00,000/- 6 Kanals Mauli Baidwan/
2025.03.18 17:02
I attest to the accuracy and 11.03.2003 0 Marlas Barani
integrity of this document
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 24
Other Connected Cases
Sr. Sale deed Sale Per Acre Area sold Location/Purpose
No. No. and Consideration Price (In ₹ )
Date (In ₹ )
13. 639/ 8,30,000/- 7,90,476/- 8 Kanals Kumbra/Chahi
24.05.2004 8 Marlas
I. Village Chilla
5.12 On perusal of the tabulated compilation of the sale exemplars
produced by the landowners with respect to village Chilla, it is evident that
the sale deeds are post 23.01.2004. The notification u/s 4 of the 1894 Act
was issued on 23.01.2004 (Ex.R11). The learned counsel representing the
GMADA has informed the Court that the area of 20 biswansis or 1 biswa is
50.41666 square yards, whereas 20 biswas or 1 bigha is 1008.3333 square
yards. 96 biswas (4 bighas 16 biswas) is equivalent to 1 acre land measuring
4840 square yards. There is a layout plan produced by the GMADA marking
the location of sale instances produced by it. It is evident that all the sale
instances produced by GMADA, namely sale deed No. 2389 dated
27.02.2003, sale deed No. 2873 dated 08.01.2004, sale deed No. 2122 dated
03.02.2003, sale deed No. 3021 dated 20.01.2004 and sale deed No. 2039
dated 20.10.2003 are of various parcels of land which are a part of the
acquired land. In other words, these sale deeds pertain to parcels of acquired
land vide notification dated 23.01.2004.
5.13 The correctness of the arguments advanced by Mr. Rupinder
Singh Khosla, Senior Advocate, representing the GMADA is not disputed by
the learned counsel representing the landowners. The RC has erred in
excluding the exemplar sale deeds No. 2389, 2873, 2122, 3021 and 2039 for
consideration by incorrectly interpreting Section 25 of the 1894 Act. This
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 25
Other Connected Cases
issue is not longer res integra in view of the judgment passed by the
Supreme Court in Lal Chand vs. Union of India (2009) 15 SCC 769.
Section 25 does not prohibit the Court from taking into account the sale
instances reflecting a price lower than the amount assessed by the LAC. It
only prohibits that the Court will not award compensation less than the
amount awarded by the LAC under Section 11 of the 1894 Act. The RC has
also erred in relying upon the judgment in Haryana State Industrial
Development Corporation v. Pran Sukh and Another (2010) 11 SCC 175
which does not lay down that the sale deeds reflecting lower price than the
amount offered by the LAC should be excluded for consideration.
5.14 Similarly, the RC has erred in working out the amount of
compensation by taking into account the average of sale deeds executed
post 23.01.2004 particularly when the sale exemplars produced by the
GMADA with respect to the acquired land were available. The sale
exemplars of the acquired land during contemporaneous period are the
important pieces of evidence to assess the market value of the acquired land
during the time period of acquisition. The landowners have failed to lead
cogent evidence to prove these sale deeds were undervalued. The sale
exemplar No. 2389 is executed between two private individuals. Prem Singh
had sold the land measuring 8 bighas which is nearly 2 acres to Harish Jain
and others. Sale deed No. 2873 has been executed by Bhag Singh and others
in favour of Sanjeev Kumar Nagal, 'Hindu Undivided Family'. The sale
instance No. 3021 has been executed by Ujaggar Singh in favour of
Surinderjit Singh HUF and others. The Court has overlooked the fact that
2025.03.18 17:02 there was no necessity to take average of the sale deeds No. 2621, 2869,
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 26
Other Connected Cases
2854 and 2620 and then roll back/decrease @ 12% per annum particularly
when the sale instances No. 2389, 2873, 2122, 3021 and 2039 of the
acquired land were available.
II. Village Mauli Baidwan
5.15 With respect to the acquired land in village Mauli Baidwan, it is
evident that all the six sale deeds produced by the landowners were post
23.01.2004. Sale instance No. 2506 produced by GMADA is with respect to
a parcel of land which is at a distance of merely 10 acres from the boundary
of the acquired land. Ex.R4 sale deed No. 2881 dated 20.05.2002 produced
by the GMADA is only at a distance of 11 acres from the acquired land.
Ex.R3, sale deed No. 849 dated 01.08.2001 pertains to a parcel of land that
is located near the residential area of village Mauli Baidwan but not far away
from the acquired land. Similar mistake was committed by the RC while
excluding the sale deeds No. 849, 288, 2506, produced by the GMADA from
consideration by incorrectly interpreting Section 25 of the 1894 Act.
5.16 On perusal of the sale exemplars No. 849, 288 and 2506, it
clearly proves that the landowners failed to prove that the market value of
the acquired land was more than ₹40,00,000/-. Per acre price of small plot
sold vide sale deed No. 849 dated 01.08.2001 comes to ₹16,00,000/-. Even if
the increase of 12% per annum for a period of 2½ years is calculated, still
the price will not be ₹40,00,000/-. With respect to agricultural land, the sale
instances No. 288 and 2506 which reflect the price of approximately
₹4,00,000/- in the year from 2002-2003. Hence, the amount offered by the
LAC did not require any interference.
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 27
Other Connected Cases
III. Village Kumbra
5.17 With respect to the cases arising from village Kumbra, it would
be noticed that the landowners have produced five sale instances which are
post 23.01.2004 period. The GMADA has produced the sale instance No.
639 dated 24.05.2004 which is also post 23.01.2004 sale instance but is
related to the parcel of land measuring 8 kanals 8 marlas which abuts the
acquired land. This particular parcel of land is located on the boundary of
the acquired land. It clearly reflects that even after the Urban Estate was
planned, the prices of the land did not shoot up.
IV. Village Raipur Khurd
5.18 With respect to the acquisition of the land in village Raipur
Khurd, the landowners have produced sale instances No. 1162, 154, 6665
and 1240 all sale instances post 23.01.2004 period. The sale deed No. 1162
is the only sale instance of the parcel of land sold in village Raipur Khurd.
The remaining sale instances No. 154, 6665 and 1240 are related to the
land sold in different villages. On the other hand, the GMADA has produced
the sale instances No. 2157, 644, 1345 and 1835 pertaining to the parcels of
the land which have been acquired vide notification dated 23.01.2004. In
other words, these sale instances are of different parcels of the land which
have been acquired. The sale instance No. 2157 is with respect to the area
more than two acres. This is the sale deed executed by Garib Siingh in
favour of Gurmeet Singh. The State had no role to play in the execution of
the aforesaid sale deed. Similarly, a land measuring 7 bighas which is more
than 1½ acres was sold on 05.06.2003 in sale instance No. 644 by Ujaggar
2025.03.18 17:02 Singh in favour of Sant Baba Balwant Singh Ji Maharaj. The sale exemplar
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 28
Other Connected Cases
No. 1345 dated 07.08.2003 is a sale deed pertaining to the land measuring
more than 1 acre executed by Kartar Singh in favour of Sher Singh. A
perusal of the sale instance No. 1835 dated 19.09.2003 proves that
approximately 9 acres of the land was sold for ₹39,80,000/-. The per acre
price comes to nearly ₹5,00,000/- per acre. Hence, it was not appropriate for
the RC to assess the market value on the basis of the market value of the
acquired land of village Chilla.
5.19 Similarly, the RC has also erred in misreading the judgment
passed by the High Court 2006 (2) PLJ 39 as well as by the Supreme Court
in Pran Sukh's case (supra). These judgments do not lay down that the sale
instances reflecting the price lower than the price offered by the LAC are not
required to be taken into account. The RC has relied upon the judgment
without properly reading the judgment. Moreover, in Lal Chand's case
(supra), the Supreme Court has already clarified the law.
5.20 The RC has also overlooked the assessment of the market value
of the acquired land vide notification dated 21.02.2000 of villages, namely
Sohana, Mauli Baidwan, Raipur Khurd and Lakhnaur. The High Court (RFA
No. 3004 of 2006 (Surjit Singh v. State of Punjab and Another) assessed
the market value of the acquired land @ ₹19,85,700/- per acre. The Supreme
Court in Paramjit Panag and Another v. State of Punjab (Civil Appeal No.
331/2014) assessed the market value @ ₹21,85,700/- by making addition of
₹2,00,000/- per acre (₹23,85,700/- per acre). The acquired land vide
notification dated 21.02.2000 abuts the acquired land vide notification dated
23.01.2004. The difference between the two notifications was only 11
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 29
Other Connected Cases
5.21 With regard to fourth submission of Mr. Jain, it would be
noticed that this Court has held that the RC has erred in assessing the market
value @ ₹71,40,000/- per acre. Hence, the submission lacks substance.
5.22 With respect to the first and second submission of Mr. Kaushal,
it would be noticed that this Court has not assessed the market value on the
basis of average price of sale exemplars No. 855 dated 12.06.2006, No. 856
dated 12.06.2006, No. 1985 dated 20.09.2006, No. 6665 dated 31.03.2006,
No. 154 dated 10.04.2008 and 1240 dated 11.07.2006 produced in the matter
related to village Mauli Baidwan. Hence, the question of applying of
appropriate cut does not arise. The learned counsel has also relied upon the
judgment passed in Horrmal (Deceased) through his LR and Others v.
State of Haryana and Others 2024 SCCOnline SC 2990. This Court has
carefully read the judgment. The Supreme Court found that Ex.P5 sale
instance is of similar nature to the acquired land. The aforesaid judgment
was passed in peculiar facts of the case. In that case, Ex.P5 was not an
exemplar sale instance of the period post notification u/s 4 whereas in these
cases, all the sale instances No. 855, 856, 1985, 6665, 154 and 1240 are
with respect to the period post 23.01.2004.
5.23 Mr. Kaushal, in Regular First Appeal No. 4608 of 2013, has
filed an application for permission to lead additional evidence in order to
produce the copies of two judgments passed by the RC on 13.03.2015 and
24.08.2013. Vide judgment dated 13.03.2015, the RC assessed the market
value of the acquired land located in village Manak Majra vide notification
u/s 4 issued on 19.04.2004 @ ₹2,30,10,000/- per acre. Similarly, with
2025.03.18 17:02 respect to the acquisition of land in village Kambala vide notification u/s 4
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 30
Other Connected Cases
dated 30.09.2005, the RC has assessed the market value @ ₹1,31,22,535/-
vide judgment dated 24.08.2013. Both these awards pertain to acquisition of
land by separate notification with respect to the land located in different
villages. The appeals against the RCs judgments are pending. Hence, it
would not be appropriate to rely upon the same.
6. Decision
6.1 Consequently, all the appeals filed by the GMADA are allowed,
whereas that of the landowners shall stand dismissed.
6.2 The miscellaneous application(s) pending, if any, in all the
appeals shall stand disposed of.
(Anil Kshetarpal)
Judge
February 25, 2025
"DK"
Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
Sr. No. Case No. Party's Name
1. RFA-1124-2013 Rajinder Kaur And Others Vs. State Of Punjab And
Others
2. RFA-1125-2013 Amrao Singh And Others Vs. State Of Punjab And
Others
3. RFA-1409-2013 Rajinder Kaur Vs. State Of Punjab
4. RFA-1410-2013 Amrao Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
5. RFA-1411-2013 Davinder Pal Singh Vs. Land Acquisition Collector &
Others
6. RFA-1412-2013 Amrao Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab
7. RFA-1413-2013 Kaka Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
8. RFA-1414-2013 Ramanjeet Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
9. RFA-1415-2013 Parvinder Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
10. RFA-1416-2013 Harmit Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
11. RFA-1417-2013 Manmohan Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
12. RFA-1418-2013 Mohan Lal Saitia Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
13. RFA-1419-2013 Gurdev Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
14. RFA-1420-2013 Dharam Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Others
15. RFA-1421-2013 Manpreet Singh Vs. Land Acquisition Collector &
DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ Another
RFA-1422-2013 Mewa Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 31
Other Connected Cases
Sr. No. Case No. Party's Name
17. RFA-1423-2013 Paramjit Kaur Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
18. RFA-1988-2013 Sumit Kumar Vs. State Of Punjab And Others
19. RFA-1989-2013 Anil Kaushik And Another Vs. State Of Punjab And
Others
20. RFA-2283-2013 Rajeev Nagpal And Others Vs. State Of Punjab And
Another
21. RFA-2284-2013 Harbans Kaur & Another Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
22. RFA-2285-2013 Harpreet Singh Vs. State Of Punjab And Another
23. RFA-2286-2013 Gian Chand And Others Vs. State Of Punjab And
Another
24. RFA-2288-2013 Rajinder Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
25. RFA-2289-2013 Ajaib Singh And Others Vs. State Of Punjab
26. RFA-2614-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Sushil
Kumar Attri And Others
27. RFA-2904-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Amarjit Singh And Others
28. RFA-2905-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Nazar
Singh And Another
29. RFA-2906-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Adish
Jain And Others
30. RFA-2907-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Kuldip
XOBJR-1-CI-2017 Singh And Others
31. RFA-2908-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Darshan Singh And Others
32. RFA-2909-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Parveen
Bajwa And Another
33. RFA-2910-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Pritam
Singh And Others
34. RFA-2911-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Mewa
Singh And Others
35. RFA-2912-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Ajaib
XOBJR-98-CI-2014 Singh And Others
36. RFA-2914-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Harpreet Singh And Another
37. RFA-2913-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Updesh
Jaspal And Others
38. RFA-2915-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Manpreet Singh And Another
39. RFA-2916-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Paramjit Kaur And Another
40. RFA-2917-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Surinderjit Singh And Another
41. RFA-2918-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Surinderjit Singh And Another
42. RFA-2919-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Surinderjit And Others
43. RFA-2920-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Surinderjit Singh And Others
DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ
2025.03.18 17:02
I attest to the accuracy and RFA-2921-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Baldev
integrity of this document
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 32
Other Connected Cases
Sr. No. Case No. Party's Name
Singh And Others
45. RFA-2922-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Devi
XOBJR-80-2023 Charan And Others
46. RFA-2924-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Karnail
XOBJR-5-CI-2018 Singh And Others
47. RFA-2923-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Santokh Singh And Others
48. RFA-2925-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Labh
XOBJR-8-2023 Singh And Others
49. RFA-2926-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Parvinder Singh
50. RFA-2927-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Sohan
Singh And Another
51. RFA-2928-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Amarjit
Singh And Another
52. RFA-2929-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Dharam
Singh And Another
53. RFA-2930-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Vijay
Kumar Jain And Another
54. RFA-2931-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Balbir
Kaur
55. RFA-2932-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Harchand Singh And Another
56. RFA-2933-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Ramanjeet Singh And Another
57. RFA-2934-2013 & Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
XOBJR-79-CI-2013 Surinderjit Singh
58. RFA-2937-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Dara
Singh And Others
59. RFA-2936-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Sucha
Singh And Another
60. RFA-2938-2013 & Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
XOBJR-77-CI-2013 Gurdeep Singh And Others
61. RFA-2940-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Amrao
Singh And Others
62. RFA-2939-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Jai
Narain And Others
63. RFA-2941-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
XOBJR-70-CI-2018 Devinder Singh And Another
64. RFA-2942-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Harmit
Singh And Another
65. RFA-2943-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Amra
Singh And Another
66. RFA-2944-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Sher
Singh And Others
67. RFA-2945-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Rajeev
Nagpal And Others
68. RFA-2946-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
XOBJR-10-2024 Palwinder Singh And Others
RFA-3222-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Amarjit
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 33
Other Connected Cases
Sr. No. Case No. Party's Name
Singh And Another
70. RFA-3223-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Gurdev
Singh And Another
71. RFA-3224-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
XOBJR-5-2023 Gurcharan Singh And Others
72. RFA-3231-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Kultar
XOBJR-51-2024 Singh And Others
73. RFA-3226-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Rajinder Nath And Others
74. RFA-3232-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Jyoti
XOBJR-80-CI-2013 Jain And Another
75. RFA-3227-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Poonam Deep Kaur And Others
76. RFA-3228-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Lalit
Jain And Another
77. RFA-3233-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Poonam Deep Kaur And Others.
78. RFA-3229-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Poonam Deep Kaur And Others
79. RFA-3234-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Rajinder Singh And Others.
80. RFA-3230-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Amrao
Singh And Another
81. RFA-3235-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Harbans Kaur And Others
82. RFA-3236-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Bhajan
Singh And Others
83. RFA-3237-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Malkiat
Singh And Others
84. RFA-3770-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Mohinder Kaur And Others
85. RFA-3774-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Surinder Kumar And Others
86. RFA-3777-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Kulwinder Singh & Others
87. RFA-3779-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Gurdev
Singh And Another
88. RFA-3781-2013 & Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
XOBJR-76-CI-2013 Gurdeep Singh & Others
89. RFA-3990-2013 Santokh Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
90. RFA-3991-2013 Poonam Deep Kaur & Others Vs. State Of Punjab &
Others
91. RFA-3992-2013 Kulwinder Singh & Another Vs. State Of Punjab &
Another
92. RFA-3993-2013 Amra Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
93. RFA-3994-2013 Amarjit Singh Bajwa Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
94. RFA-3995-2013 Lalit Jain & Another Vs. State Of Punjab & Others
95. RFA-4038-2013 Surinder Kumar Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ
2025.03.18 17:02
I attest to the accuracy and RFA-4039-2013 Surinderjit Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Others
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 34
Other Connected Cases
Sr. No. Case No. Party's Name
97. RFA-4042-2013 Gurdev Singh Vs. State Of Punjab
98. RFA-4043-2013 Bhajan Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab
99. RFA-4044-2013 Amarjit Singh Vs. State Of Punjab And Another
100. RFA-4045-2013 Mohinder Kaur & Another Vs. State Of Punjab &
Another
101. RFA-4046-2013 Ujagar Singh Vs. State Of Punjab
102. RFA-4047-2013 Harchand Singh Vs. State Of Punjab And Another
103. RFA-4048-2013 Mohinder Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
104. RFA-4049-2013 Balbir Kaur Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
105. RFA-4050-2013 Poonam Deep Kaur & Another Vs. State Of Punjab &
Others
106. RFA-4051-2013 Kultar Singh @ Avtar Singh & Another Vs. State Of
Punjab & Others
107. RFA-4052-2013 Poonam Deep Kaur & Others Vs. State Of Punjab &
Others
108. RFA-4053-2013 Baldev Singh & Another Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
109. RFA-4054-2013 Sher Singh & Another Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
110. RFA-4055-2013 Gurdev Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
111. RFA-4056-2013 Surinderjit Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab & Others
112. RFA-4057-2013 Surinderjit Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab & Others
113. RFA-4058-2013 Amarjit Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
114. RFA-4059-2013 Pal Singh & Another Vs. State Of Punjab
115. RFA-4264-2013 Darshan Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
116. RFA-4265-2013 Rulda Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab
117. RFA-4266-2013 Surinderjit Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Others
118. RFA-4452-2013 Rachan Singh And Others Vs. State Of Punjab And
Another
119. RFA-4491-2013 Karnail Singh And Others Vs. State Of Punjab And
Another
120. RFA-4628-2013 Kanwar Singh Vs. State Of Punjab
121. RFA-4629-2013 Parveen Bajwa Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
122. RFA-4630-2013 Lalit Jain & Others Vs. State Of Punjab & Others
123. RFA-4631-2013 Baldev Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
124. RFA-4632-2013 Nazar Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
125. RFA-4633-2013 Pawan Kumar Vs. State Of Punjab
126. RFA-4634-2013 Savitri Devi & Others Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
127. RFA-4635-2013 Updesh Jaspal & Another Vs. State Of Punjab & Others
128. RFA-4646-2013 Rajinder Nath & Another Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
129. RFA-4664-2013 & Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
XOBJR-78-CI-2013 Poonam Deep Kaur And Others
130. RFA-4727-2013 Amrik Singh And Another Vs. State Of Punjab And
Another
131. RFA-4985-2013 Pawan Kumar Vs. State Of Punjab
132. RFA-1126-2013 Bhagat Singh Vs. State Of Punjab
2025.03.18 17:02 133. RFA-1424-2013 Kamaljit Singh Vs. State Of Punjab
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 35
Other Connected Cases
Sr. No. Case No. Party's Name
134. RFA-1425-2013 Ajit Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab
135. RFA-1426-2013 Balbir Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab
136. RFA-2465-2013 Bakhtaur Singh Vs. State Of Punjab
137. RFA-2466-2013 Karnail Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
138. RFA-2615-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Jaspal
Singh And Others
139. RFA-2899-2013 Paramjit Singh Vs. State Of Punjab
140. RFA-3144-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Pankaj
Sood And Others
141. RFA-3145-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Gurnam Singh And Another
142. RFA-3146-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Raghbir
Singh And Another
143. RFA-3147-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Ajit
Singh And Others
144. RFA-3148-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Labh
Kaur And Another
145. RFA-3149-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Bakhtaur Singh And Another
146. RFA-3150-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Harmail Singh And Others.
147. RFA-3151-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Raghbir
Singh And Another
148. RFA-3152-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Pawan
Kumar And Another
149. RFA-3153-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Bahadur Singh And Another
150. RFA-3154-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Kesar
Singh And Another
151. RFA-3155-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Piara
Singh And Another
152. RFA-3156-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Baldev
Singh And Another
153. RFA-4027-2013 Pawan Kumar Vs. State Of Punjab
154. RFA-4028-2013 Gursharan Kaur Vs. State Of Punjab
155. RFA-4293-2013 Mewa Singh Vs. State Of Punjab
156. RFA-4295-2013 Surinder Rani & Others Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
157. RFA-4608-2013 Jaspal Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
158. RFA-4610-2013 Baldev Singh Vs. State Of Punjab
159. RFA-4611-2013 Kesar Singh & Another Vs. State Of Punjab
160. RFA-4612-2013 Dharminder Kumar & Others Vs. State Of Punjab
161. RFA-4613-2013 Pankaj Sood & Others Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
162. RFA-4614-2013 Harmail Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab
163. RFA-4615-2013 Raj Bala @ Raj Kumari Vs. State Of Punjab
164. RFA-4616-2013 Raghbir Singh Vs. State Of Punjab
DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 165. RFA-4617-2013 Harchand Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab
RFA-4618-2013 Labh Kaur Vs. State Of Punjab
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 36
Other Connected Cases
Sr. No. Case No. Party's Name
167. RFA-4619-2013 Jaspal Kaur & Others Vs. State Of Punjab
168. RFA-4620-2013 Raghbir Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
169. RFA-4621-2013 Piara Singh Vs. State Of Punjab
170. RFA-4622-2013 Ram Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
171. RFA-4623-2013 Harpal Singh & Another Vs. State Of Punjab
172. RFA-4624-2013 Harjinder Singh (Deceased) through his LRs Vs. State Of
Punjab
173. RFA-4625-2013 Labh Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
174. RFA-4626-2013 Bhagat Singh Vs. State Of Punjab
175. RFA-4627-2013 Jarnail Singh & Another Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
176. RFA-4824-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Parvinder Kaur And Others.
177. RFA-4825-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Gursharan Kaur And Another
178. RFA-4827-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Dial
Singh And Others.
179. RFA-4828-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Bhagat
Singh & Another
180. RFA-4829-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Mewa
Singh & Another
181. RFA-4984-2013 Jagir Kaur And Others Vs. State Of Punjab
182. RFA-5486-2013 Parkashwati And Others Vs. State Of Punjab
183. RFA-5631-2013 & Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Gurdev
XOBJR-56-CI-2015 Kaur And Another
184. RFA-5632-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Baldev
Singh & Others
185. RFA-5633-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Jarnail
Singh & Others
186. RFA-5634-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Labh
Singh & Others
187. RFA-5635-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Surinder Rani & Others
188. RFA-5636-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Baldev
XOBJR-52-2024 Kaur & Others
189. RFA-5637-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Bakhatur Singh And Others
190. RFA-5638-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Karnail
Singh And Another
191. RFA-5639-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Parkashwati & Others
192. RFA-5640-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Angrez
Kaur & Others
193. RFA-5641-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Raghbir
Singh & Others.
194. RFA-5643-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Naib
Singh And Others.
195. RFA-5644-2013 & Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Mohan
DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ XOBJR-57-CI-2015 Singh And Another
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 37
Other Connected Cases
Sr. No. Case No. Party's Name
196. RFA-5645-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Kamaljit Singh And Another
197. RFA-5646-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Sukhdev Singh & Others
198. RFA-5647-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Harbhajan Singh & Others
199. RFA-5648-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Bant
XOBJR-23-2019 Singh & Others
200. RFA-5649-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Paramjit Kaur And Another
201. RFA-5650-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Dharminder Kumar & Others
202. RFA-5651-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Raj
Bala And Another
203. RFA-5652-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Bhagat
Singh And Another
204. RFA-5653-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Harjinder Singh And Another
205. RFA-5654-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Balbir
Singh & Others
206. RFA-5655-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Paramjit Singh And Another
207. RFA-5656-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Himmat Singh & Others
208. RFA-5657-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Jaspal
Kaur & Others
209. RFA-5658-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Harpal
Singh & Another
210. RFA-5676-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Harbhajan Singh & Others
211. RFA-2061-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Jaspal Singh And Others
212. RFA-2062-2014 State Of Punjab And Another Vs. Sushil Kumar Attri
213. RFA-4418-2013 Khushbagh Singh And Others Vs. State Of Punjab And
Another
214. RFA-1211-2013 Amarjit Singh And Others Vs. State Of Punjab And
Others
215. RFA-1672-2013 Sumit Kumar Vs. State Of Punjab And Others
216. RFA-1427-2013 Gurmail Singh Vs. State Of Punjab
217. RFA-2281-2013 Sushil Kumar Attri Vs. State Of Punjab And Others
218. RFA-2282-2013 Amarjit Singh And Another Vs. State Of Punjab And
Others
219. RFA-2287-2013 Himat Singh And Others Vs. State Of Punjab And Others
220. RFA-2290-2013 Sushil Kumar Attri Vs. State Of Punjab And Others
221. RFA-2376-2013 Rajeev Nagpal And Another Vs. State Of Punjab And
Others
222. RFA-2378-2013 Anil Kaushik And Another Vs. State Of Punjab And
Another
DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 223. RFA-2592-2013 Jagjit Singh Vs. State Of Punjab
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 38
Other Connected Cases
Sr. No. Case No. Party's Name
224. RFA-2823-2013 Adish Jain And Another Vs. State Of Punjab And Others
225. RFA-2935-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Manmohan Singh And Another
226. RFA-3376-2013 Vijay Kumar & Others Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
227. RFA-3771-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Rachan
Singh & Others
228. RFA-3772-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Amrik
Singh And Others
229. RFA-3773-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Savitri
Devi & Others
230. RFA-3775-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Sumit
Kumar And Another
231. RFA-3776-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Karnail
XOBJR-124-2021 Singh And Another
232. RFA-3778-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Gurvir
XOBJR-49-CI-2013 Kaur Gill And Others
233. RFA-3780-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Kaka
Singh And Others
234. RFA-3782-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Davinder Pal Singh And Others
235. RFA-3783-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Baldev
Singh & Others
236. RFA-4609-2013 Amar Singh & Another Vs. State Of Punjab & Others
237. RFA-4663-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Nasib
XOBJR-17-CI-2014 Singh And Others
238. RFA-4826-2013. Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Amarjit
Singh And Another
239. RFA-4830-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Harjit
XOBJR-135-CI-2015 Singh And Others.
240. RFA-5487-2013 Sukhdev Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Others
241. RFA-6127-2013 Gian Singh & Others Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
242. RFA-6128-2013 Sadhu Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
243. RFA-6129-2013 Mewa Singh & Another Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
244. RFA-6130-2013 Gurdial Singh & Another Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
245. RFA-6131-2013 Palo Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
246. RFA-6132-2013 Jasbir Singh And Another Vs. State Of Punjab And
Another
247. RFA-6134-2013 Gurwinder Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
248. RFA-6133-2013 Jasbir Singh Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
249. RFA-6695-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Gurdev
Singh & Another
250. RFA-6696-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Ujagar
Sigh & Another
251. RFA-6697-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Bhag
Singh And Another
252. RFA-6698-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Ram
Pal And Another
2025.03.18 17:02 253. RFA-6699-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Amrik
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 39
Other Connected Cases
Sr. No. Case No. Party's Name
Singh And Others
254. RFA-6700-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Pawan
Kumar & Another
255. RFA-6701-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Amrik
XOBJR-18-2023 Singh & Others
256. RFA-6702-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Gian
Chand And Another
257. RFA-6703-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Narajan
Singh & Others
258. RFA-6704-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Ajaib
Singh & Others
259. RFA-6705-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Pal
Singh And Others
260. RFA-6706-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Manjit
XOBJR-8-CI-2014 Singh & Another
261. RFA-6707-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Mohinder Singh And Others
262. RFA-6708-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Bhajan
Singh And Others
263. RFA-6709-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Amarjit
Singh And Another
264. RFA-6710-2013 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Baljit
XOBJR-17-2023 Singh And Others
265. RFA-6711-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Rajinder Kaur And Others
266. RFA-6712-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Swaran
Singh & Others
267. RFA-6713-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Kanwar
Singh And Another
268. RFA-6714-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Amrao
Singh And Others
269. RFA-6715-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Jagjit
Singh & Another
270. RFA-6716-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Mohan
Lal Saitia And Another
271. RFA-6717-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Gurmail Singh And Another
272. RFA-6718-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Vijay
Kumar & Others
273. RFA-50-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Sumit
Kumar And Others
274. RFA-51-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Amarjit
Singh And Others
275. RFA-202-2014 Bachan Singh And Others. Vs. State Of Punjab And
Others.
276. RFA-203-2014 Sucha Singh & Another Vs. State Of Punjab & Others
277. RFA-821-2014 Rashbhinder Singh And Another Vs. State Of Punjab
And Others
DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 278. RFA-1442-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
2025.03.18 17:02
I attest to the accuracy and Narmail Singh & Others
integrity of this document
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 40
Other Connected Cases
Sr. No. Case No. Party's Name
279. RFA-1443-2014 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
XOBJR-309-CI-2016 Gurmail Singh And Another
280. RFA-1444-2014 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
XOBJR-308-CI-2016 Gurmail Singh & Others
281. RFA-1445-2014 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Gurmit
XOBJR-311-CI-2016 Singh & Others
282. RFA-1446-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Gian
Singh & Others
283. RFA-1447-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Jasbir
Singh & Others
284. RFA-1448-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Mewa
Singh & Others
285. RFA-1449-2014 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Sohan
XOBJR-162-CI-2015 Singh & Others
286. RFA-1450-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Joginder Kaur & Another
287. RFA-1451-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Gurwinder Singh
288. RFA-1452-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Gurdial
Singh & Another
289. RFA-1453-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Palo
And Another
290. RFA-1454-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Jasbir
Singh And Another
291. RFA-1455-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Sucha
Singh & Others.
292. RFA-1456-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Gurmukh Singh & Others
293. RFA-1457-2014 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Kuldip
XOBJR-251-CI-2016 Singh & Others
294. RFA-1458-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Sadhu
Singh And Another
295. RFA-1459-2014 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Ajit
XOBJR-9-CI-2014 Singh & Others
296. RFA-1484-2014 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
XOBJR-348-CI-2016 Surinderpal Singh & Others.
297. RFA-1460-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Rashbhinder Singh & Others.
298. RFA-3492-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Amrao Singh And Another
299. RFA-3491-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Poonam Deep Kaur & Another
300. RFA-1011-2016 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Raj
XOBJR-246-CI-2016 Kumari And Another
301. RFA-1800-2017 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Avtar
XOBJR-13-CI-2018 Singh And Another
302. RFA-3493-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Labh Singh & Others
303. RFA-3005-2016 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Bhag
XOBJR-2-CI-2017 Singh And Others
with XOBJR-326-CI-
RFA-3494-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Ajaib Singh & Others
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 41
Other Connected Cases
Sr. No. Case No. Party's Name
305. RFA-3496-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Devi Charan & Others
306. RFA-3495-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Updesh Jaspal & Others
307. RFA-3497-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Lalit Jain And Another
308. RFA-3498-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Ramanjeet Singh
309. RFA-3499-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Santokh Singh & Others
310. RFA-3500-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Dara Singh & Others
311. RFA-3501-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Palwinder Singh & Others
312. RFA-3502-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Paramjit Kaur
313. RFA-3503-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Manmohan Singh
314. RFA-3504-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Gurcharan Singh & Others
315. RFA-3506-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Harchand Singh
316. RFA-3505-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Rajinder Nath & Another
317. RFA-3507-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Pritam Singh & Others
318. RFA-3510-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Mewa Singh & Others
319. RFA-3508-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Harpreet Singh
320. RFA-3509-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Poonam Deep Kaur & Another
321. RFA-3511-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Amra Singh
322. RFA-3512-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Surinderjit Singh And Others
323. RFA-3513-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Baldev Singh & Others
324. RFA-3514-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Gurdeep Singh & Others
325. RFA-3515-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Sucha Singh And Another
326. RFA-3516-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Poonam Deep Kaur & Others
327. RFA-3517-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Devinder Singh
328. RFA-3518-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Surinderjit Singh & Others
329. RFA-3519-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Harmit Singh
330. RFA-3520-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Nazar Singh
331. RFA-3521-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Parvinder Singh And Another
332. RFA-3522-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Surinderjit Singh & Another
333. RFA-3523-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Sher Singh & Others
334. RFA-3525-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Kuldip Singh & Others
335. RFA-3524-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Amarjit Singh & Others
336. RFA-3526-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Malkiat Singh & Others
337. RFA-3527-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Sohan Singh Andanother
338. RFA-3528-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Amarjit Singh And Another
339. RFA-3529-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Karnail Singh & Others
340. RFA-3530-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Parveen Bajwa And Another
341. RFA-3531-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Kultar Singh & Others
342. RFA-3532-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Gurdev Singh And Another
343. RFA-3533-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Bhajan Singh & Others
344. RFA-3534-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Balbir Kaur And Another
345. RFA-3535-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Hardip Kaur Gill And Another
346. RFA-3536-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Surinderjit Singh & Others
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 42
Other Connected Cases
Sr. No. Case No. Party's Name
347. RFA-3537-2014 Land Acquisition Collector, Urban Estate Mohali Vs.
Manpreet Singh And Another
348. RFA-3538-2014 State Of Punjab And Another Vs. Surinderjit Singh &
Another
349. RFA-3539-2014 State Of Punjab And Another Vs. Jyoti Jain & Others
350. RFA-3540-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Lalit Jain & Others
351. RFA-3541-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Sumit Kumar And Another
352. RFA-3542-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Amrik Singh & Others
353. RFA-3543-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Pal Singh & Another
354. RFA-3544-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Karnail Singh And Another
355. RFA-3545-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Ujjager Singh
356. RFA-3563-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Kulwinder Singh & Others
357. RFA-3546-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Jagjit Singh
358. RFA-3562-2014 State Of Punjab And Another Vs. Harbans Kaur And
Others
359. RFA-3564-2014 State Of Punjab And Another Vs. Vijay Kumar And
Another
360. RFA-3547-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Amrik Singh & Others
361. RFA-3565-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Darshan Singh & Others
362. RFA-3548-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Bhajan Singh And Others
363. RFA-3549-2014 State Of Punjab And Another Vs. Poonam Deep Kaur
And Others
364. RFA-3550-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Baldev Singh & Others
365. RFA-3566-2014 State Of Punjab And Another Vs. Jai Narain & Others
366. RFA-3567-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Rachan Singh And Others
367. RFA-3551-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Bhag Singh
368. RFA-3568-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Gurdeep Singh And Others
369. RFA-3570-2014 State Of Punjab And Another Vs. Adish Jain And Others
370. RFA-3552-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Amarjit Singh
371. RFA-3569-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Swaran Singh
372. RFA-3571-2014 State Of Punjab And Another Vs. Dharam Singh And
Another
373. RFA-3553-2014 State Of Punjab And Another Vs. Mohinder Singh
374. RFA-3572-2014 State Of Punjab And Another Vs. Rajeev Nagpal And
Others
375. RFA-3575-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Savitri Devi And Others
376. RFA-3554-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Nasib Singh And Others
377. RFA-3555-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Ajaib Singh & Others
378. RFA-3573-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Surinder Kumar And Another
379. RFA-3574-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Manjit Singh
380. RFA-3556-2014 State Of Punjab And Another Vs. Amrao Singh And
Others
381. RFA-3576-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Gurvir Kaur Gill And Another
382. RFA-3557-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Naranjan Singh & Others
2025.03.18 17:02 383. RFA-3577-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Kanwar Singh
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 43
Other Connected Cases
Sr. No. Case No. Party's Name
384. RFA-3558-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Ram Pal
385. RFA-3578-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Amarjit Singh & Others
386. RFA-3560-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Mohinder Kaur And Others
387. RFA-3559-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Kaka Singh & Others
388. RFA-3579-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Devinder Pal Singh And Another
389. RFA-3580-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Vijay Kumar And Others
390. RFA-3561-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Gurdev Singh & Others
391. RFA-3582-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Amrik Singh And Others
392. RFA-3581-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Gian Chand And Others
393. RFA-3583-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Amrao Singh
394. RFA-3584-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Mohan Lal Saitia
395. RFA-3585-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Rajinder Singh
396. RFA-3586-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Gurdev Singh
397. RFA-3587-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Gurmail Singh
398. RFA-3588-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Pawan Kumar
399. RFA-3589-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Baljit Singh And Others
400. RFA-3590-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Rajinder Kaur
401. RFA-4230-2014 Vijay Kumar And Others Vs. State Of Punjab And
Another
402. RFA-7263-2014 Vijay Kumar Jain Vs. State Of Punjab And Others
403. RFA-9436-2014 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
XOBJR-24-CI-2018 Baljinder Singh & Others
404. RFA-9437-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Bachan
Singh & Others
405. RFA-9439-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Mohinder Singh & Others
406. RFA-9440-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Mohinder Singh & Others
407. RFA-4294-2013 Angrez Kaur & Others Vs. State Of Punjab & Another
408. RFA-2126-2014 Gurdev Kaur & Another Vs. State Of Punjab & Others
409. RFA-4266-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Khushbagh Singh & Others
410. RFA-9760-2014 Ramanjit Singh & Another Vs. State Of Punjab &
Another
411. RFA-9825-2014 Naib Singh Vs. Punjab State And Another
412. RFA-10343-2014 Mohinder Singh And Others Vs. State Of Punjab &
Others
413. RFA-418-2015 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Gurdev
Kaur & Another
414. RFA-1903-2015 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Lal
Singh And Others
415. RFA-2258-2014 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority & Others
Vs. Kishan Dev @ Krishan Dev & Others
416. RFA-2259-2014 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority & Others
XOBJR-35-CI-2017 Vs. Gurmail Singh & Another
2025.03.18 17:02 417. RFA-2260-2014 & Greater Mohali Area Development Authority & Others
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 44
Other Connected Cases
Sr. No. Case No. Party's Name
XOBJR-14-CI-2014 Vs. Devi Dayal & Another
418. RFA-2261-2014 & Greater Mohali Area Dev Authority (Gmada) Vs.
XOBJR-23-CI-2014 Daljinder Singh & Others
419. RFA-2262-2014 & Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Karnail
XOBJR-55-CI-2015 Singh & Another
420. RFA-2434-2014 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority & Others
XOBJR-325-CI-2016 Vs. Gurmail Singh & Others
421. RFA-1707-2015 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (Gmada)
Vs. Surinder Rani And Others
422. RFA-2342-2015 Surinder Rani And Others Vs. State Of Punjab And
Another
423. RFA-3891-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Amarjit Singh
424. RFA-3892-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Raghbir Singh & Another
425. RFA-3893-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Mewa Singh
426. RFA-3894-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Jarnail Singh
427. RFA-3895-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Parvinder Kaur
428. RFA-3896-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Ajit Singh & Others
429. RFA-3897-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Bakhatur Singh
430. RFA-3898-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Harbhajan Singh & Others
431. RFA-3899-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Harchand Singh
432. RFA-3900-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Angrez Kaur
433. RFA-3901-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Paramjit Singh
434. RFA-3902-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Gursharan Kaur
435. RFA-3903-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Dial Singh And Others
436. RFA-3904-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Harjit Singh & Others
437. RFA-3905-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Harmail Singh And Others
438. RFA-3906-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Gurnam Singh
439. RFA-3907-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Baldev Singh
440. RFA-3909-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Balbir Singh And Others
441. RFA-3908-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Dharminder Kumar & Others
442. RFA-3910-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Baldev Kaur And Others
443. RFA-3911-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Kesar Singh And Another
444. RFA-3912-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Parkashwati And Others
445. RFA-3913-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Harjinder Singh
446. RFA-3914-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Himmat Singh And Others
447. RFA-3915-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Labh Kaur
448. RFA-3916-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Sukhdev Singh And Others
449. RFA-3917-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Naib Singh
450. RFA-3918-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Raghbir Singh
451. RFA-3919-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Bant Singh And Others
452. RFA-3920-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Pankaj Sood And Others
453. RFA-3921-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Gurdev Kaur
454. RFA-3922-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Paramjit Kaur
2025.03.18 17:02 455. RFA-3923-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Jaspal Kaur & Others
Regular First Appeal No. 3225 of 2013 (O&M) And 45
Other Connected Cases
Sr. No. Case No. Party's Name
456. RFA-3924-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Labh Singh And Others
457. RFA-3925-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Bahadur Singh
458. RFA-3926-2014 with State Of Punjab Vs. Baldev Singh & Others
XOBJR-36-2022
459. RFA-3927-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Bakhtaur Singh
460. RFA-3928-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Surinder Rani & Others
461. RFA-3929-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Harbhajan Singh And Others
462. RFA-3930-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Piara Singh
463. RFA-3931-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Pawan Kumar
464. RFA-3932-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Bhagat Singh
465. RFA-3933-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Mohan Singh
466. RFA-3934-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Raj Bala Alias Raj Kumari
467. RFA-3935-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Raghbir Singh
468. RFA-3936-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Harpal Singh & Another
469. RFA-3937-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Bhagat Singh
470. RFA-3938-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Kamaljit Singh
471. RFA-3939-2014 State Of Punjab Vs. Karnail Singh
472. RFA-994-2015 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Rajeev Nagpal & Another
473. RFA-995-2015 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Vijay
Kumar & Others
474. RFA-996-2015 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Jai
Narain & Others.
475. RFA-2130-2015 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Sushil
Kumar Attri And Others
476. RFA-2131-2015 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Ramanjit Singh And Others
477. RFA-5414-2015 Sukhdeep Singh And Others Vs. State Of Punjab &
Others
478. RFA-4213-2016 Sucha Singh Vs. State Of Punjab And Another
479. RFA-4261-2016 Pritam Singh Since Deceased Through LRs & Others Vs.
State Of Punjab & Another
480. RFA-1410-2017 Parvinder Kaur Vs. State Of Punjab
481. RFA-2129-2015 with Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. Bhagat
XOBJR-148-CI-2015 Singh And Others s
482. RFA-3680-2018 Rajinder Nath Vs. State Of Punjab And Another
483. RFA-5642-2013 Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs.
Harchand Singh & Others
(Anil Kshetarpal)
Judge
February 25, 2025
"DK"
