Rikhi Ram Through His Gpa Parshotam Dass Through His Gpa Avtar Dass Alias Tota Ram v. State Of Punjab Through Land Acquisition Collector, Bathinda

238-Urgent

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 7706 of 2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 21.05.2026 Rikhi Ram through his General Attorney Parshotam Dass though his General Attorney Avtar Dass @ Tota Ram .......... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab through Land Acquisition Collector (Sub Divisional Officer, Civil), Maur, District Bathinda .......... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

Present:

Mr. Judgepreet Singh Warring, Advocate for the petitioner (through video-conferencing). Mr. Karunesh Kaushal, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent assisted by Mr. Gurjinder Singh, SDM, Maur (through video-conferencing) **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) By way of present revision petition, challenge has been made to an order dated 07.05.2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Bathinda-cum-Executing Court, whereby it has been held that the petitioner is not entitled for release of the amount of compensation.

[2] I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the case file.

[3] Sh. Gurjinder Singh, SDM, Maur, who appears through video-conferencing, provides assistance in the matter. Upon examination of records, he informs that the name of revenue estate is "Maur Kalan", which forms part of Had Bast No. 14, but usually the area of Abadi therein is DINESH KUMAR 2026.05.25 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CR No. 7706 of 2025 (O&M) [2] termed as "Maur Mandi", as such there is no difference between "Maur Kalan" and "Maur Mandi" and both are part of one Had Bast only. He also ascertains that the land under acquisition forms part of the revenue estate of Village Maur Kalan only bearing Had Bast No. 14. As per record, the learned officer also informs that after the demise of petitioner-Rikhi Ram, in terms of settlement arrived at between his widow and Parshotam Dass, the original amount of award was released in favour of Avtar Dass @ Tota Ram somewhere in the year 1999.

[4] In such circumstances, the findings recorded by the learned Executing Court to the effect that the claim made by the petitioner with respect to the enhanced compensation in terms of judgment and decree dated 30.05.1992 cannot be granted, is without any basis. Consequently, the order dated 07.05.2025 passed by the learned Executing Court is hereby set aside. The learned Executing Court is requested to pass a fresh order in Execution Case No. EXE/392/2018 with respect to release of the enhanced compensation in favour of Rikhi Ram, in accordance with law. [5] Disposed of accordingly.

[6] Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.

May 21, 2026 ( HARKESH MANUJA ) 'dk kamra'

JUDGE Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No DINESH KUMAR 2026.05.25 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document