RFA-2868 106 (22 cases) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA State of Punjab and others Pal Singh and others CORAM: Present: HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) CM-3057 Section 151 CPC, however on the oral request made by learned counsel for the applicant, the same is treated to be under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC for taking on record the si in order land parcels proved on record by the appellants/landowners pertaining to the revenue estate of village 07.08.1985 and Ex.A to the land under acquisition in the present case. 2. 2868-1999 (O&M) & other connected cases cases) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** RFA other connected cases. Date of Decision: State of Punjab and others Versus Pal Singh and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Addl.A.G., Punjab. Mr.Aditya Dhawan, Advocate and Mr. Surendra Pant, Advocate for the appellant (s)/ landowner(s) -.- HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) 3057-CI-2025 in RFA-2868-1999 Though the present application has been filed under Section 151 CPC, however on the oral request made by learned counsel for the applicant, the same is treated to be under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC for taking on record the si to demonstrate the locational and geographical proximity of land parcels forming part of the two sale instances relied upon and proved on record by the appellants/landowners pertaining to the revenue estate of village Kotduna Pand 985 and Ex.A-2 dated 22.01.1983 to the land under acquisition in the present case. Notice of the application was issued on 04.11.2025. 1999 (O&M) & other connected cases [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA-2868-1999 (O&M) and other connected cases. Date of Decision: 13.02.2026 …….Appellants Versus ..….Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Addl.A.G., Punjab. Aditya Dhawan, Advocate and Mr. Surendra Pant, Advocate for the appellant (s)/ landowner(s) 1999 Though the present application has been filed under Section 151 CPC, however on the oral request made by learned counsel for the applicant, the same is treated to be under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC for taking on record the site plan (Shajra) as Exhibit A, to demonstrate the locational and geographical proximity of the two sale instances relied upon and proved on record by the appellants/landowners pertaining to the Kotduna Pandher as Ex.A-1 dated 2 dated 22.01.1983 in comparison with respect to the land under acquisition in the present case. Notice of the application was issued on 04.11.2025. Though the present application has been filed under Section 151 CPC, however on the oral request made by learned counsel for the applicant, the same is treated to be under Order 41 te plan (Shajra) as Exhibit A, to demonstrate the locational and geographical proximity of the two sale instances relied upon and proved on record by the appellants/landowners pertaining to the 1 dated with respect SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-2868 3. has been filed 4. has been filed 4. due consideration of the averments the site plan Ex.A-1 and Ex.A remained compensation, especially when the comparative location in site plan was depicted by the revenue authorities on a 17.09.2025 Naib Tehsildar, 5. (Shajra) as MAIN CASE Appeals, details of which are given in the footnote of this judgment, are being decided as all the appeals have arisen out of common acquisition/Award involving common facts and question of law. For the sake of brevity, facts are being taken 2. laid to the decision dated Additional District Judge, Reference Court’) 2868-1999 (O&M) & other connected cases Despite having availed repeated opportunities, no reply has been filed on behalf of the non-applicant(s) Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon due consideration of the averments made in the application as well as the site plan depicting the comparative location of the sale instances 1 and Ex.A-2 viz-a-viz the acquired land; the remained unrebutted, would help the Court to compensation, especially when the comparative location in site plan was depicted by the revenue authorities on a 09.2025 moved at the instance of the landowners to the office of Naib Tehsildar, Dhanola. Accordingly, the prayer is allowed and the site plan ) as Exhibit-A is taken on record as piece of evidence MAIN CASE: Vide this common order, a bunch of Appeals, details of which are given in the footnote of this judgment, are being decided as all the appeals have arisen out of common acquisition/Award involving common facts and question of law. For the sake of brevity, facts are being taken By way of filing the present appeal(s) challenge has been laid to the decision dated 27.03.1999 Additional District Judge, Sangrur (hereinafter referred to as ‘ Reference Court’). 1999 (O&M) & other connected cases [2] Despite having availed repeated opportunities, no reply applicant(s)-State. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon made in the application as well as comparative location of the sale instances the acquired land; the same having would help the Court to determine just and fair compensation, especially when the comparative location in site plan was depicted by the revenue authorities on an application dated at the instance of the landowners to the office of the prayer is allowed and the site plan is taken on record as piece of evidence. Vide this common order, a bunch of 21 Regular First Appeals, details of which are given in the footnote of this judgment, are being decided as all the appeals have arisen out of common acquisition/Award involving common facts and question of law. For the sake of brevity, facts are being taken from RFA No.2868-1999. way of filing the present appeal(s) challenge has been 27.03.1999 passed by the learned (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Despite having availed repeated opportunities, no reply Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon made in the application as well as comparative location of the sale instances having determine just and fair compensation, especially when the comparative location in site plan application dated at the instance of the landowners to the office of the prayer is allowed and the site plan Regular First Appeals, details of which are given in the footnote of this judgment, are being decided as all the appeals have arisen out of common acquisition/Award involving common facts and question of law. For . way of filing the present appeal(s) challenge has been passed by the learned the SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-2868 3. estate of Village Barnala, District Sangrur vide notifications dated Sections 4 and 6 of the respectively, for public purpose The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘the LAC’) vide award 02.07.1991 Rs.60,00 for Rosli under the Act. 4. landowners filed which came to be disposed of by the learned Refe decision dated 5. the present appeals were preferred at the instance of appellant as well as 6. through the paper behalf of the respondents/ landowners. 7. three revenue estates of Villages Kotduna Pandh 2868-1999 (O&M) & other connected cases Briefly stating, some land situated within the revenue estate of Villages Kotduna Pandher, Pandher and , District Sangrur, was acquired by the Government of vide notifications dated 10.08.1988 Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short ‘the Act’ respectively, for public purpose, namely, The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘the LAC’) vide award 02.07.1991 assessed market value in respect of the acquired land @ 00/- per acre for Chahi and N and Gair Mumkin land, along with all under the Act. Dissatisfied with the aforesaid award, the appellants/ landowners filed reference petitions invoking Section 18 of the Act, which came to be disposed of by the learned Refe decision dated 27.03.1999. Aggrieved of the decision of the present appeals were preferred at the instance of appellant as well as respondents/ landowners. I have heard learned counsel for the par through the paper-book. I find substance in the submission behalf of the respondents/ landowners. The present appeal relates to acquisition of land three revenue estates of Villages Kotduna Pandh 1999 (O&M) & other connected cases [3] land situated within the revenue r, Pandher and Razza, Tehsil , was acquired by the Government of Punjab 10.08.1988 and 29.03.1989, issued under Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short ‘the Act’ , namely, for “construction of drain The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘the LAC’) vide award assessed market value in respect of the acquired land @ Nehri land, Rs.40,000/- per ac along with all other statutory benefits Dissatisfied with the aforesaid award, the appellants/ reference petitions invoking Section 18 of the Act, which came to be disposed of by the learned Reference Court vide decision of the learned Reference Court, the present appeals were preferred at the instance of appellant/State I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone I find substance in the submissions made on behalf of the respondents/ landowners. The present appeal relates to acquisition of land falling three revenue estates of Villages Kotduna Pandher, Pandher and land situated within the revenue Tehsil Punjab , issued under Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short ‘the Act’ drain”. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘the LAC’) vide award assessed market value in respect of the acquired land @ cre other statutory benefits Dissatisfied with the aforesaid award, the appellants/ reference petitions invoking Section 18 of the Act, rence Court vide the learned Reference Court, /State ties and gone made on falling in r, Pandher and SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-2868 Razza, District Barnala vide n under Section 4 of the Act passed on 02.07.1991. The purpose, namely, “ petitions preferred at the instance of respondents/ landowners enhancement of compensation, were discussio by the respondents/ landowners reference petitions w damages similarity to the nature of land forming part of the aforementioned three revenue estates, uniform market value was assessed in favour of the respondents/ lan 8. purpose of acquisition, it has gone uncontroverted estates of Villages Kotduna Pandh abutting and adjoining has been established on record that the boundaries of the revenue estates of Village Kotduna Pandhar and Pandher adjoins each other and the revenue estate of Village Razza further abuts the boundary of Village Pandhar. 9. and also 2868-1999 (O&M) & other connected cases District Barnala vide notification under Section 4 of the Act and award under Section 11 of the Act was passed on 02.07.1991. The acquisition purpose, namely, “for construction of drain petitions preferred at the instance of respondents/ landowners enhancement of compensation, were on made with respect to even by the respondents/ landowners. A reference petitions were disposed of s towards severance. Admittedly, taking into account the similarity to the nature of land forming part of the aforementioned three revenue estates, uniform market value was assessed in favour of the respondents/ landowners by the LAC. Even otherwise, from the records and also from the purpose of acquisition, it has gone uncontroverted estates of Villages Kotduna Pandhe abutting and adjoining to each other has been established on record that the boundaries of the revenue estates of Village Kotduna Pandhar and Pandher adjoins each other and the revenue estate of Village Razza further abuts the boundary of Village Pandhar. Besides the revenue record in the shape of jamabandies and also the site plan (Shajra), the respondents/ landowners hav 1999 (O&M) & other connected cases [4] otification dated 10.08.1988 isused ward under Section 11 of the Act was acquisition was carried out for public for construction of drain”. Certain Reference petitions preferred at the instance of respondents/ landowners enhancement of compensation, were dismissed without even n a single piece of evidence As per the records, few other ere disposed of by granting limited relief Admittedly, taking into account the similarity to the nature of land forming part of the aforementioned three revenue estates, uniform market value was assessed in favour downers by the LAC. Even otherwise, from the records and also from the purpose of acquisition, it has gone uncontroverted that the revenue er, Pandher and Razza, are all to each other (located in the close vicinity). It has been established on record that the boundaries of the revenue estates of Village Kotduna Pandhar and Pandher adjoins each other and the revenue estate of Village Razza further abuts the boundary of the revenue record in the shape of jamabandies ), the respondents/ landowners hav dated 10.08.1988 isused ward under Section 11 of the Act was was carried out for public rence petitions preferred at the instance of respondents/ landowners for dismissed without even a single piece of evidence led other granting limited relief of Admittedly, taking into account the similarity to the nature of land forming part of the aforementioned three revenue estates, uniform market value was assessed in favour Even otherwise, from the records and also from the that the revenue are all the close vicinity). It has been established on record that the boundaries of the revenue estates of Village Kotduna Pandhar and Pandher adjoins each other and the revenue estate of Village Razza further abuts the boundary of the revenue record in the shape of jamabandies ), the respondents/ landowners have SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-2868 proved on record two Village Kotduna Pandh hereunder: Exhibits sale deed Ex.A1 Ex.A2 as piece of additional evidence officials on an application submitted by the landowners to Tehsildar, Dhanaula A2 are located in close around 2 kms 10. discerned that larger area of 1K10M higher sale price, needs to be relied upon. per acre needs to gap of almost 5 ½ years between 20.01.1983 and the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act 10.08.1988, an appreciation @ 8% (compounded) needs to be applied. As such the base price per acre comes to Rs.1,05,908/ 2868-1999 (O&M) & other connected cases proved on record two sale deeds pertaining to the land parcels of Village Kotduna Pandher. The details thereof are extracted hereunder:- Exhibits of sale deed date of execution Area in kanal and marla Ex.A1 07.08.1985 16 marlas Ex.A2 20.01.1983 1K From the site plan Ex.A, which has been taken on record as piece of additional evidence been prepared by the revenue officials on an application submitted by the landowners to Tehsildar, Dhanaula, it is evident that the two sale deeds A2 are located in close geographical proximity around 2 kms from the acquired land. Upon comparing the two sale instances, discerned that Ex.A2 dated 20.01.1983 which pertains to relatively larger area of 1K10M and also being sale price, needs to be relied upon. e for assessing the market value o be taken at Rs.69,334/- per acre. Further, taking into account that there has been a time gap of almost 5 ½ years between 20.01.1983 and the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act 10.08.1988, an appreciation @ 8% (compounded) needs to be applied. As such the base price per acre comes to Rs.1,05,908/ 1999 (O&M) & other connected cases [5] pertaining to the land parcels of r. The details thereof are extracted Area in kanal and marla Rate per acre 16 marlas Rs.60,000/- 1K-10M Rs.69,331/- From the site plan Ex.A, which has been taken on record been prepared by the revenue officials on an application submitted by the landowners to Naib , it is evident that the two sale deeds Exs.A1 and geographical proximity and at a distance of the two sale instances, it can be Ex.A2 dated 20.01.1983 which pertains to relatively being the sale instance fetching the sale price, needs to be relied upon. Therefore, the base price market value while relying upon Ex.A2 per acre. aking into account that there has been a time the sale instance Ex.A2 dated 20.01.1983 and the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act 10.08.1988, an appreciation @ 8% (compounded) needs to be applied. As such the base price per acre comes to Rs.1,05,908/- per pertaining to the land parcels of r. The details thereof are extracted From the site plan Ex.A, which has been taken on record been prepared by the revenue Naib Exs.A1 and at a distance of it can be Ex.A2 dated 20.01.1983 which pertains to relatively fetching the Therefore, the base price relying upon Ex.A2 aking into account that there has been a time the sale instance Ex.A2 dated 20.01.1983 and the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act i.e. 10.08.1988, an appreciation @ 8% (compounded) needs to be per SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-2868 acre (Rs.69,334/ Ex.A2 pertains to 1K vis-a-viz the acquired land suitable deduction of 25% needs to be applied towards smallness of area. Accordi by rounding it off to Rs.80,000/ under Section4 of the Act in the present case 11. acquired in the pre runs horizontally through three revenue estates common entitled for the uniform rate of market value i.e. @ Rs.80,000/ acre, besides all other statutory benefits including solatium and interest thereupon. 12. with respect to respondents/ landowners to the extent of 75% o the un-acquired land across the land towards the village excessive circumstances and 13. 2868-1999 (O&M) & other connected cases acre (Rs.69,334/-+ 8% (for 5 ½ years). However, considering the fact pertains to 1K-10M which is relatively a smaller parcel of land viz the acquired land which is me deduction of 25% needs to be applied towards smallness of . Accordingly, the market price per acre comes to Rs.79431/ by rounding it off to Rs.80,000/- per acre under Section4 of the Act in the present case Further, taking into account the fact that the land parcel acquired in the present case is only around 16.5 acres and the same runs horizontally through three revenue estates n public purpose, the respondents/ landowners are held entitled for the uniform rate of market value i.e. @ Rs.80,000/ besides all other statutory benefits including solatium and interest thereupon. Insofar as the plea raised on behalf of the appellant with respect to the grant of damages towards severance in favour of respondents/ landowners to the extent of 75% o acquired land across the drain and 50% of the un land towards the village by the learned Reference Court being ssive, the same needs to be modified in the given facts and circumstances and also in the wake of material a No doubt, due to severance 1999 (O&M) & other connected cases [6] 5 ½ years). the fact that the sale exemplar 10M which is relatively a smaller parcel of land easuring 16.50 acres, as such a deduction of 25% needs to be applied towards smallness of the market price per acre comes to Rs.79431/- a per acre as on the date of notification under Section4 of the Act in the present case. aking into account the fact that the land parcel sent case is only around 16.5 acres and the same runs horizontally through three revenue estates; been utilized for one public purpose, the respondents/ landowners are held entitled for the uniform rate of market value i.e. @ Rs.80,000/- per besides all other statutory benefits including solatium and the plea raised on behalf of the appellant-State grant of damages towards severance in favour of respondents/ landowners to the extent of 75% of the market value of drain and 50% of the un-acquired by the learned Reference Court being , the same needs to be modified in the given facts and in the wake of material available on record. severance the respondents/landowners that the sale exemplar 10M which is relatively a smaller parcel of land as such a deduction of 25% needs to be applied towards smallness of and as on the date of notification aking into account the fact that the land parcel sent case is only around 16.5 acres and the same utilized for one public purpose, the respondents/ landowners are held per besides all other statutory benefits including solatium and State grant of damages towards severance in favour of f the market value of acquired by the learned Reference Court being , the same needs to be modified in the given facts and vailable on record. the respondents/landowners SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-2868 are bound to suffer loss towards cultivation of land besides causing them inconvenience towards connectivity of the Moreover, severance also causes reduction in value of remaining land due to alteration in access, u loss of agricultural viability etc. severance/ bifurcation of the land holdings of the respondents/ landowners ha State through the granting damages @ 25% of the market value for the remaining land However, upon perusal of record, record, so as to create any distinction towards damages located across the drain or towards the Village been eq passed by the learned Reference Court is modified to the extent that the respondents/ landowners shall be entitled for damages towards severanc across the drain and also towards the village. 14. instance of 15. unfortunately expired in the appeal(s)/ cross thereof and the legal heirs have not been impleaded, they shall be at 2868-1999 (O&M) & other connected cases are bound to suffer loss towards cultivation of land besides causing them inconvenience towards connectivity of the Moreover, severance also causes reduction in value of remaining land due to alteration in access, useability, irregularity of shape and loss of agricultural viability etc. and in the present case, the factum of severance/ bifurcation of the land holdings of the respondents/ landowners has been acknowledged and accepted by the appellant through the award dated 02.07.1991 passed by the LAC granting damages @ 25% of the market value for the remaining land However, upon perusal of record, no material record, so as to create any distinction towards damages against severance for the remaining unacquired land located across the drain or towards the Village qually affected by the present passed by the learned Reference Court is modified to the extent that the respondents/ landowners shall be entitled for damages towards severance @ 50% of the market value of the unacquired land both across the drain and also towards the village. With the aforesaid modification, all the appeals filed at the instance of State as well as landowners are disposed of Further, wherever, the l unfortunately expired in the appeal(s)/ cross thereof and the legal heirs have not been impleaded, they shall be at 1999 (O&M) & other connected cases [7] are bound to suffer loss towards cultivation of land besides causing them inconvenience towards connectivity of the left out parcels Moreover, severance also causes reduction in value of remaining seability, irregularity of shape and and in the present case, the factum of severance/ bifurcation of the land holdings of the respondents/ been acknowledged and accepted by the appellant award dated 02.07.1991 passed by the LAC wh granting damages @ 25% of the market value for the remaining land no material has been placed record, so as to create any distinction towards awarding the extent of severance for the remaining unacquired land located across the drain or towards the Village which has apparen present acquisition. Thus, the award passed by the learned Reference Court is modified to the extent that the respondents/ landowners shall be entitled for damages towards e @ 50% of the market value of the unacquired land both across the drain and also towards the village. With the aforesaid modification, all the appeals filed at the State as well as landowners are disposed of. Further, wherever, the landowner(s) has/have unfortunately expired in the appeal(s)/ cross-objection(s) after filing thereof and the legal heirs have not been impleaded, they shall be at are bound to suffer loss towards cultivation of land besides causing parcels. Moreover, severance also causes reduction in value of remaining seability, irregularity of shape and and in the present case, the factum of severance/ bifurcation of the land holdings of the respondents/ been acknowledged and accepted by the appellant- hile granting damages @ 25% of the market value for the remaining land. has been placed on the extent of severance for the remaining unacquired land ntly the award passed by the learned Reference Court is modified to the extent that the respondents/ landowners shall be entitled for damages towards e @ 50% of the market value of the unacquired land both With the aforesaid modification, all the appeals filed at the andowner(s) has/have objection(s) after filing thereof and the legal heirs have not been impleaded, they shall be at SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-2868 liberty to seek execution of the present decision by moving appropriate application(s) before 16. disposed of. 13.02.2026 sanjay Sr. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 13.02.2026 sanjay 2868-1999 (O&M) & other connected cases liberty to seek execution of the present decision by moving appropriate application(s) before the learned Executing Court. Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned? Whether Reportable? Sr. No. Case No. 1. RFA-1739-1996 (O&M) 2. RFA-2862-1999 (O&M) 3. RFA-3066-1999 (O&M) 4. RFA-2833-1999 (O&M) 5. RFA-2685-1998 (O&M) 6. RFA-1436-1998 (O&M) 7. RFA-2869-1999 (O&M) 8. RFA-2864-1999 (O&M) 9. RFA-2867-1999 (O&M) 10. RFA-2863-1999 (O&M) 11. RFA-2870-1999 (O&M) 12. RFA-1389-1996 (O&M) 13. RFA-2865-1999 (O&M) 14. RFA-2866-1999 (O&M) 15. RFA-3062-1999 (O&M) 16. RFA-3056-1999 (O&M) 17. RFA-3057-1999 (O&M) 18. RFA-3065-1999 (O&M) 19. RFA-3063-1999 (O&M) 20. RFA-3061-1999 (O&M) 21. RFA-3064-1999 (O&M) 2026 1999 (O&M) & other connected cases [8] liberty to seek execution of the present decision by moving the learned Executing Court. Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Yes/No 1996 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1998 (O&M) 1998 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) (O&M) 1999 (O&M) (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE liberty to seek execution of the present decision by moving Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document