High Court of Punjab and HaryanaRFA/1393/1997dismissed

Raj Bala v. State Of Haryana

2015-08-25Mr. Justice Ramendra Jain2 pages

RFA No.1393 of 1997 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA No.1393 of 1997 (O&M) Date of decision: 25.8.2015 Smt. Raj Bala ..... Appellant

Versus

The State of Haryana and another ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL

Present:

None for the landowner.

Mr. Abhinash Jain, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. RAJESH BINDAL, J The landowner is before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land.

Brief facts of the case are that the State of Haryana vide notification dated 24.3.1993, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') sought to acquire land situated within the revenue estate of village Palla, Hadbast No.128, Tehsil and District Faridabad, for construction of road for Sector 33, Faridabad-Ballabgarh Controlled Area. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 24.3.1993. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, 'the Collector') vide award dated 27.4.1993 assessed the market value of the acquired land. The landowner feeling dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, filed objections. Considering the material placed on record, the learned court below vide its award dated 25.10.1996, determined the market value of the land @ ` 150/- per square yard. It is this award which is impugned in the present appeal.

Learned counsel for the State submitted that the issue raised in the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in RFA No.1735 of 1996 titled as S.C.Garg and another v. The State of Haryana and others, decided on 21.4.2009, whereby the award of the learned reference SHARMILA 2015.08.31 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.

Chandigarh

RFA No.1393 of 1997 -2court assessing compensation @ ` 150/- per square yard for the acquired land, was upheld.

For the detailed reasons recorded in S.C. Garg's case (supra), no case for further enhancement of compensation is made out. However, as none has appeared for the landowner, the appeal is dismissed for nonprosecution. (RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE 25.8.2015 sharmila SHARMILA 2015.08.31 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.

Chandigarh