Baru Since Deceased Through His Lrs v. State Of Haryana & Others

RFA No.1344 of 1994 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA No.1344 of 1994 (O&M) Date of decision: 25.5.2015 Baru (deceased) through LRs ..... Appellant

Versus

Haryana State and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL

Present:

Mr. Gurpreet Jayia, Advocate, for Mr. Jagdish Manchanda, Advocate, and Mr. B.S. Walia, Advocate for the landowners.

Mr. Raj Kumar Makkad, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. RAJESH BINDAL, J This order will dispose of a set of appeals bearing RFA Nos.1344 of 1994, 1185, 1189, 1305 of 1996, 2031, 2032, 2225 of 1997, 891 of 1999, 336 to 339, 541 of 2006 and 658 of 2008, as common questions of law and facts are involved in these appeals.

The landowners are before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land, whereas, the State is seeking reduction thereof.

Brief facts of the case are that the State of Haryana vide notification dated 5.8.1986, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') sought to acquire land situated within the revenue estate of villages Andhera, Mangalora Kadim, Mangalora and Shital Garhi, Tehsil and District Karnal, for construction of approaches and guide bounds etc. for proposed Yamuna Bridge on Karnal-Meerut Road. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 28.10.1986. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short 'the Collector') vide award dated 18.2.1987 assessed the market value of the acquired land of different villages at different rates. The land owners being dissatisfied with the award of the Collector filed objections which were referred to the learned Court below. On reference, the learned Court below assessed the compensation of the SHARMILA 2015.05.29 11:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.

Chandigarh

RFA No.1344 of 1994 -2acquired land @ ` 40,000/- per acre. However, in RFA No.891 of 1999, the learned court reference court upheld the award of the Collector and dismissed the reference petition. Aggrieved against the award of the learned court below, both the parties are in appeal before this court. Learned counsel for the parties submitted that the issue raised in the present set of appeals is squarely covered by judgment of this Court in RFA No. 1116 of 1996-- Haryana State and others v. Anchal and others, decided on 1.3.2013, vide which this Court upheld the award of the learned court below.

Accordingly, for the reasons recorded in Anchal's case (supra), the present appeals are disposed of in terms thereof. (RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE 25.5.2015 sharmila SHARMILA 2015.05.29 11:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.

Chandigarh