← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaRFA/1792/2004disposed of

Amrilt Bala And ORS v. State Of Haryana And ORS

2025-12-02Mr. Justice Harkesh Manuja8 pages

   



  

   

     !

"   #$

&'



"

'

   

()!

*  +,   *- " 

( '





Brief facts of the case are that         

  

  ( $.

    , 

  (            00

  

!

 1

(   +,   *-  "     #  *-  &'      

 .

  

       23  !   !  $  4  +  ,   %  (    

 . (

, 

   $ )



          

      +  ,   %    

"

'/

"

' 



"

'  

!

*  *- 

)   .

5   

  .

( 



% (       . ( 6$  )



 

 

    

    

 

  !

 

 

 

 .  8 .

 1 9.

   

      

   

.  

 

 . (



, 



  

  *--":;</1'





 

  -**

   .   .

  ( $ , 

 

   23! /!=!3<( $=

.  

.



   0 -**

 6 >

  .  

, 

       (

 

. 



 *--":;</1'+  

      , 

      .  .  $ 

--   ( ,

     .   (  

, 

          (    

0 ?    

       

  

       

 @ .    

     

     

 

          0 -**

  (

   

.. (  *--":;</1'



  $

 %    

    

     0 -**9

  

 

 @ 



   



 =A 

;% 

 

      

  !"#< - 

( ;  



B/ !

"# 

  $% 

#  &'

( ! ) *

 +# )

", - '

.'

% / 0./ 1 2 3

 4"-5 67* 

#  8

  9+%&*  #

:   % ;

%  %: .# /& ,.  ,,,

 .  ,.

%: .# ;

/& 

 ,.#

&

. 

/&

  

 <# *  

 .  ;

&

%,#

  

 <# 

;

%,/ 

  /# '

!



%

 /&

;        = <# 

,



#/>  <#  /& & ; & * 

#, ;#  ;. & '

?&

  %& / # ;* . ;

 

 /#  '

@ %& / /

 

;

 ,

& ; & * %& / % # ; 

#/

 

  ,

'

 $%,* ;

%  %: .# ;



<#

 * ,  #   %

; 

  <#     3 %& . %& ,; '

!

/ # * . 

# ;

& *  AA ;

#   %&  ;

# 

 

 , ;%  :

;

# ;

.& ,

;

  ,



#



,#

 ,

;;   .&

 

;

  '9 

%,

#,, 5. ;

 

#,  

&    &

,   <# *

#

# * /; ,

 

*

 ;&     .

 #%  '

 $%,* ;

 <# 

;



&  *  %&  / ,

/ 

%  %: .#* /

      3 , * /& ,.     ;

B  CB , &*

  ,, ,

   , ;

%%./ ,,

 %  

;



#&

%

 /& % 

 C B ;%     '

"#

; 

& /;     , ;   

  '

? 

 %&'

(

   

%  

 6 <#    / ;

& # ;

%  %: .# ; 3 <# '

0 +  

 

 @

.

  ( ( 

      (

  .

    

 



     

 

          .   (

C )



$ )



 

 



   

 /!      * 9(    

  

  

)9   

9   

.

 .    

- 

(   -**

 

 @0-)@ 

  3 $





 , 

  

.

 

   23! / =!3<(

$9  ; 

. . (  .      $

 %     +  

 @    -*-       *--        $       #  %     & '

    (   $ )





 

    4 

. *--





  

( 

 :;</1 9  

  ,      ..

  (      

  .

 @0-)@ *-  





 .

  3 $ 

, 

  

     23 ! /!( $   ;

   

  23! /   9 

) 

 ..





;.

   (

  



, 

 

  

.. ( 

$



6    *--  ":;</1' 

     

     0 -**

 

!

 *-   C

 ;

 

=A !



)

* $+ ,- .

/  ##0 12 3 2 4  (

 00

 !

  

 

 5 

"

'.



    





,  ..

(       ;

  

! /!

/ 

  

  -** 

   

D.

  ) 

  .  =A



;%  

6 .$/ #% 7.89 :

 ;* .<

6

 8  + 

 " ' !%% *

    8 .

   

( 

.



  .

  

*>  

    . (

    

  

   $ (

 @ ;  



B/ Taking an overall view in the matter and the consistent view of this Court, the fair and reasonable compensation in the present case would be best determined if we apply 8% annual increase with cumulative effect. This is for the reason that the gap is huge i.e. 11 years. For shorter period of 3-5 years, it could have been 10% or 12%. But in no case 15% would be justified for a period of 11 years as awarded by the High Court in the impugned order. In the present case, given the 11 years gap, 8% would be considered just and proper."

 E

(

( 

 .



  .

 8)

 .

 

. 

(   *--6$ )



  

  .  





8   . ( .

6 )



 9 

  , 



   ;  .  E  %..

$     ( )  



  

6 .$/ 5

"

'    

6*>

 .  .



    -** 

 

,    

   .

    .   (        

,   .

$  F/



 9(    

 



   

  

 



/

      !



 .

 



       .

  

/ 

    "

'/ 

( "

'( 

   

        ;



  

  .

        

     

(

      

/ 

D 8  



.

  .



 



  < 

    

     

)

 C

)F

 B

F@ C



F@

3      $7/0-/ "?HE'

 $7/ / "?HE'

$7/ 1/ "?HE'

$7/

/ "?HE'

 $7/ * / "?HE'

1 $7/ * / "?HE'

0 $7/ */ "?HE'

* $7/

/ "?HE'

   

)