Surinder Kumar And ANR v. State Of Punjab And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 13.05.2026 Surinder Kumar and another ...Appellants Vs.

State of Punjab and others

...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA

Present:

Mr. Naresh Kaushal, Advocate for the appellants.

Mr. Rahul Rampal, Addl. A.G. Punjab.

Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Rishita Kaushik, Advocate for respondent No.2. *** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J.(Oral) The present appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 09.01.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge by which, order dated 26.06.2015 passed by Acquisition Collector was modified and the Corporation was directed to pay a lump sum of Rs.6 lacs.

2.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the lump sum amount awarded by learned Single Judge is not to the satisfaction of the appellants, hence, the appellants be given opportunity to approach the appropriate authority i.e. Collector for determining the compensation to be paid to the appellants for using the land belonging to them from 1993 till 2002 when the same was acquired by the respondents by availing appropriate remedy.

3.

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the appellants have already taken the amount as awarded by the learned Single Judge and therefore, they could not be granted the said benefit so as to modify the amount of compensation which has been already decided by the learned Single Judge. 4.

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance. 5.

Once, the appellants are not satisfied with the said decision of the learned Single Judge qua the fixation of compensation and are seeking more amount as compensation than what has been awarded for using the land belonging to the appellants by respondents starting from 1993 onwards till 2002 when the same was acquired, they have right to seek appropriate remedy for the redressal of their grievance before appropriate authority. Hence, the appellants are given the liberty to approach the Collector for assessing the compensation to which they are entitled, for the amount to be paid by the respondents for using the land from 1993 to 2002. 6.

It may be noticed that in case it is found that the compensation already paid by the respondents under the orders passed by learned Single Judge is less than the amount so arrived at after due assessment of the same at the hands of the collector, the same will be adjusted while making the payment, which will be taken into account by the competent authority while granting the relief to the appellants.

7.

In case, any such proceeding are initiated to such compensation, let the same be decided as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six months from the date the same is filed in accordance with law by following proper procedure.

8.

It is made clear that this Court is not making any observation on the merits of the case, which will be decided by the authority concerned, keeping in view the law, facts and evidence brought before such Court. The judgment of the learned Single Judge is modified accordingly. 9.

In case, it is found that the entitlement of the appellants is less than amount that has already been paid by the respondents, the excess amount received by the appellants from the respondents will be refunded by the appellants to the respondents.

10.

The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

11.

Pending civil miscellaneous application, if any, stands disposed of. (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) JUDGE 13.05.2026 vanita Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether Reportable :

No