111 IN TH Mohar Sing State of Har CORAM: Present: HARKESH appeal, pre 1894 (for dated 26.0 Judge, Ka Court”), fo [2] landowner came to b 09.10.1973 respectivel utilization urban esta IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR RFA Date r Singh Versus of Haryana HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HAR Mr. Rajeshwar Oswal, Advoca Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for the appellant-landowner. Mr. Abhinash Jain, Deputy Adv for the respondent-State of Ha **** KESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) The appellant-landowner, b al, preferred under Section 54 of t (for short “1894 Act”), seeks 6.08.1997 passed by the lea Karnal (hereinafter to be re for enhancement of compensat Briefly stating, certain land wner situated within the revenue to be acquired vide notifications .1973 issued under Sections 4 ctively, for the public purpose nam ion of the land as residential and estates to be set up in the area UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH RFA No. 2582 of 1997 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.02.2026 ...Appellant ...Respondent HARKESH MANUJA dvocate for ty Advocate General, Haryana of Haryana. , by instituting the present 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, modification of the award e learned Additional District be referred as “Reference ensation amount. land owned by the appellant- enue estate of Village Karnal, ations dated 02.05.1973 and ns 4 and 6 of the 1894 Act e namely “for development and l and commercial area in the area of Village Karnal”. Vide DINESH KUMAR 2026.02.24 19:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
      -2-      Award dated 23.11.1973, the Land Acquisition Collector, Urban Estates, Faridabad (for short “LAC’) determined the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.270/- per biswas alongwith other statutory benefits. [3] Aggrieved of the aforesaid Award dated 23.11.1973, the appellant-landowner filed reference under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, which was disposed off vide decision dated 26.08.1997 by the learned Reference Court, whereby the market value of the entire land was assessed at the rate of Rs. 22/- per square yard alongwith other statutory benefits. Dissatisfied with the aforesaid decision of the learned Reference Court, the present appeal has been preferred at the instance of appellant- landowner. [4] After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the paper-book / records, I am unable to find substance in the submission(s) made on behalf of the appellant(s)-landowner(s). [5] Upon perusal of record, it has been found that the learned Reference Court determined the market value at the rate of Rs. 22/- per square yard, while placing reliance upon an earlier award dated 05.11.1980 (Exhibit P-1) passed by the then Reference Court in relation to the acquisition in hand. Besides it, no other evidence was ever led by the appellant-landowner to substantiate his claim. Also, no further adjudication or determination either by this Court or the Hon’ble Apex Court has DINESH KUMAR 2026.02.24 19:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
      -3-      been brought to the notice of this Court in relation to Award Exhibit P-1. [6] Consequently, no case for interference in the impugned award is made out, the present appeal being devoid of merits, is hereby dismissed. [7] Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand(s) disposed off.
February 23, 2026 ( HARKESH MANUJA ) ‘dk kamra’ JUDGE

    
    DINESH KUMAR 2026.02.24 19:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document