Punjab-Haryana High Court
Tejvir And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 20 February, 2014
Author: Sabina
Bench: Sabina
RFA No. 71 of 2009 -1-
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Regular First Appeal No. 71 of 2009
Date of Decision: 20.2.2014.
Tejvir and others .......Appellants
Versus
State of Haryana and others .......Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Present: Mr. Sanjay Vij, Advocate
for the appellants.
Mr. D.D.Gupta, Addl. A.G., Haryana.
None for HUDA.
****
SABINA, J.
Vide notification dated 29.3.1996 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ('Act' for short), the land was sought to be acquired in village Choma for development and utilization of land for Sector 2-3 road at Gurgaon. Appellants sought reference under Section 18 and 30 of the Act. However, vide award dated 8.9.2008, the reference sought by the appellants was dismissed for want of evidence.
Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that as per statement No. 19 of the Act, father of the appellants was recorded as Dholidar qua the acquired land in question. The Reference Court while dismissing the reference had failed to consider the said statement. Learned counsel has further submitted that as the references were clubbed together, appellants had failed to place on record documents to corroborate the statement No. 19 of the Act. Learned counsel for the appellants has prayed that the case be remanded back to the Reference Court for the Singh Gurpreet 2014.02.20 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh RFA No. 71 of 2009 -2- fresh decision.
Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has opposed the appeal.
In the present case, appellants had sought reference under Section 18 and 30 of the Act. A perusal of the record reveals that as per statement No. 19 of the Act, father of the appellants has been described as Dholidar qua the acquired land. It appears that since the land references were clubbed together, the appellants failed to lead their evidence in support of their case. In the facts of the present case, it would be just and expedient to set aside the impugned award qua the appellants and remand the matter back to the Reference Court for deciding it afresh after giving opportunity to the appellants to lead their evidence in support of their case.
Accordingly, this appeal is allowed. The impugned award dated 8.9.2008, qua the appellants, is set aside. Reference Court is directed to pass a fresh order, in accordance with law after affording opportunity to the appellants to lead their evidence.
(SABINA) JUDGE February 20, 2014 Gurpreet Singh Gurpreet 2014.02.20 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh