[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Satnam Singh And Ors vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 16 January, 2026
1 RFA-6494
6494-2015 and RFA-2099-2014
217
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RFA-6494-2015
2015
Date of Decision: January 16,, 2026
SATNAM SINGH AND ORS ......Appellants
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS .....Respondents
RFA-2099-2014
2014
AMARJEET KAUR AND ORS .....Appellants
Versus
STATE OFHARYANA AND ANR ....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present: Mr. Sandeep Punchhi, Advocate for the appellants
in RFA-6494-2015.
RFA
Mr. Gurdarshan S. Sidhu, Advocate for the appellants
in RFA-2099-2014.
RFA
Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana.
****
HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)
Vide this common order, aforesaid two Regular First Appeals
shall stand disposed of. For convenience the facts a
are drawn from RFA--
6494-2015.
By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the
judgment dated 03.08.2012 passed by the learned Additional District
Judge, Sirsa, whereby the reference petition filed under Section 18 of the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by the
appellants-landowners,
landowners, seeking enhancement of compensation was
partly allowed.
2. Briefly stating, land measuring 16 acres, 4 kanals and 3
marlas, situated within the revenue estate of Village Shamshabad, Tehs
Tehsilil
and District Sirsa was acquired for the public purpose for construct
construction
ion of
Sewerage Treatment Plant. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short
'LAC') passed Award No.4 dated 10.11.2010 assessing the total market
value at the rate of Rs.7,19,12,530/-
Rs.7,19,12,530/ i.e.. Rs.30,00,000/
Rs.30,00,000/- per acre.
TEJWINDER SINGH
2026.01.19 18:01
I agree to specified portions
of this document
2 RFA-6494-2015 and RFA-2099-2014
3. The appellant-landowner, feeling dissatisfied with the award,
sought reference under Section 18 of the Act pleading that the acquired
land was of commercial nature as the adjacent land was being used for
the purpose of Seed Factory. It was further pleaded that even otherwise
the market value of the land was not less than Rs. 80,00,000/- per acre.
4. Upon notice, the same was contested by the respondents by
way of filing a joint written statement contending that the petitioners
concealed the true facts from the Court and petition was barred for non-
joinder and mis-joinder of necessary parties.
5. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the following issues
were framed by learned Reference Court on 20.01.2012:-
"1. What was the prevailing market price of the acquired
land as on the date of notification under Section 4 of the
Land Acquisition Act? OPP
2. Whether petitioners are entitled to enhancement of
compensation, on the grounds is alleged in the petition?
OPP
3. Whether the present petition is not maintainable in the
present form and the petitioners have no cause of
action and locus standi to file the petition? OPR
4. Relief."
6. After considering the evidence, the learned Additional District
Judge, Sirsa, vide award dated 03.08.2012 enhanced the amount of
compensation to Rs.39,00,000/- per acre.
7. Aggrieved of the aforesaid award dated 03.08.2012 passed
by the learned Additional District Judge, Sirsa, the appellants-landowners
filed the present appeal.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone
through the paper-book.
9. A perusal of the record shows that based on the sale deed
Ex.P-6 dated 08.09.2009 pertaining to 5 marlas 8 sirsai of land forming
part of the same revenue estate of village Shamshabad against sale
consideration of Rs.1,14,000/- with base price per acre of Rs.40,00,000/-,
the appellants-landowners were awarded the benefit of re-assessment of
market value to the tune of Rs.39,00,000/- per acre over the acquired
land notified on 07.08.2009 under Section 4 of the Act. Further, no other
material evidence has been brought to the notice of the Court so as to
TEJWINDER SINGH
2026.01.19 18:01
I agree to specified portions
of this document
3 RFA-6494-2015 and RFA-2099-2014
call for any interference with the well-reasoned finding recorded by the
learned Reference Court based on proper appreciation of pleadings and
the evidence available on record while making assessment of just and
fair market value to be assessed to the landowners-appellants.
10. In such circumstances, the award dated 03.08.2012 passed
by the learned Reference Court calls for no interference. Resultantly, the
appeals preferred at the instance of landowners are dismissed. It may be
noticed here that the appeals preferred at the instance of respondent-
State already stands dismissed vide judgment dated 14.12.2012 passed
in RFA-6873 of 2012.
11. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
16.01.2026 (HARKESH MANUJA)
Tejwinder JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
TEJWINDER SINGH
2026.01.19 18:01
I agree to specified portions
of this document
