Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 140]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Smt. Veena Rani And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 3 May, 2012

Author: Rajesh Bindal

Bench: Rajesh Bindal

            R. F. A No. 4460 of 2011                                (1)



         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                      AT CHANDIGARH

                                            R.F.A No. 4460 of 2011 (O&M)
                                            Date of decision : 3.5.2012


Smt. Veena Rani and others                                    ..... Appellants

                                       vs

State of Haryana and others                                   .... Respondents
Coram:      Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal


Present:    Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate for the appellants.

Mr. Anjum Ahmed, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.

Rajesh Bindal J.

The landowners have filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land.

Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 18.8.2005, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), State of Haryana sought to acquire land situated within the revenue estate of village Mundri, Hadbast No. 7, Tehsil Guhla, District Kaithal, for construction of BML Hansi Branch-Bhutana Branch Multi Purpose Link Channel from RD 0-91000 off taking from RD 340300-L Bhakra main line. The same was followed by notification issued under Section 6 of the Act dated 13.9.2005. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, "the Collector") vide his award dated 6.1.2006 assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 5,00,000/- per acre. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference, the learned court below determined fair market value of the acquired land @ ` 8,00,000/- per acre. It is this award which is impugned by the landowners before this court.

Learned counsel for the landowners submitted that the claim R. F. A No. 4460 of 2011 (2) made in the present appeal is squarely covered by judgment of this Court in RFA No. 1714 of 2009 State of Haryana and another vs Pala Ram and others, decided on 1.5.2012, whereby the compensation was determined @ ` 9,00,000/- per acre for the acquired land.

Accordingly, for the reasons recorded in Pala Ram's case (supra), the present appeal is disposed of in the same terms.



03.05.2012                                           (Rajesh Bindal)
sharmila                                                  Judge