RFA-225 115 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Devinder Singh and others State of Punjab and others CORAM: Present: HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) laid to the decision dated Additional District Judge, Reference Court’) 2. forming part of revenue estate of Village Sandaur, the then Tehsil Malerkotla, District Sangrur, came to be acquired vide notification dated 28.11.1985 (published on 12.12.1 Acquisition Act, 1 dated 05.01.1989. The acquisition was carried out for the public purpose, namely, “ 225-1997 (O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA Date of Decision: Devinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH Present: Mr.Kulbir Singh Saini, Advocate for Mr. Madan Lal Saini, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Addl.A.G., Punjab --- HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) By way of filing the present appeal challenge has been laid to the decision dated 06.04.1995 Additional District Judge, Sangrur, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Reference Court’). Briefly stating, some land owned by the appellants forming part of revenue estate of Village Sandaur, the then Tehsil Malerkotla, District Sangrur, came to be acquired vide notification dated 28.11.1985 (published on 13.12.1985) and dated 19.11.1986 (published on 12.12.1986) issued under Section Acquisition Act, 1894, for short ‘the Act’, followed by award No. dated 05.01.1989. The acquisition was carried out for the public purpose, namely, “for extension of Kangwal Distributory IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA-225-1997 (O&M) Date of Decision: 05.03.2026 …….Appellants Versus ..….Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr.Kulbir Singh Saini, Advocate for Mr. Madan Lal Saini, Advocate Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Addl.A.G., Punjab. way of filing the present appeal challenge has been 06.04.1995 passed by the learned Sangrur, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the some land owned by the appellants forming part of revenue estate of Village Sandaur, the then Tehsil Malerkotla, District Sangrur, came to be acquired vide notification (published on 13.12.1985) and dated 19.11.1986 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land 94, for short ‘the Act’, followed by award No. 367/5 dated 05.01.1989. The acquisition was carried out for the public for extension of Kangwal Distributory’. way of filing the present appeal challenge has been passed by the learned Sangrur, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the some land owned by the appellants forming part of revenue estate of Village Sandaur, the then Tehsil Malerkotla, District Sangrur, came to be acquired vide notifications (published on 13.12.1985) and dated 19.11.1986 of the Land 67/5 dated 05.01.1989. The acquisition was carried out for the public SANJAY GUPTA 2026.03.06 15:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-225 3. Reference Court, the appellants/ landowners sought reference under Section 18 of the Act, however, the same was dismissed by the learned Reference Court vide award dated 06.04.1995 for want of evidence led by the enhancement of compensation. 4. the present appeal landowners 5. through the paper 6. order to support their claim for enhancement of compensation. As per the records, sufficient opportunity was afforded t appellants/landowners, however, they failed to produce any material evidence perversity with the award dated 06.04.1995 passed by the learned Reference Court, the present appeal being devoid dismissed. 7. disposed of. 05.03.2026 sanjay 225-1997 (O&M) [2] Aggrieved of the determination made by the learned Reference Court, the appellants/ landowners sought reference under Section 18 of the Act, however, the same was dismissed by the learned Reference Court vide award dated 06.04.1995 for want of evidence led by the appellants/ landowners, to support their claim for enhancement of compensation. Aggrieved of the decision of the present appeal was preferred at the instance of landowners. I have heard learned counsel for t through the paper-book as well as records of the case. There is no evidence led by the appellants/ landowners in order to support their claim for enhancement of compensation. As per the records, sufficient opportunity was afforded t appellants/landowners, however, they failed to produce any material evidence on record. In such circumstances, finding no illegality or perversity with the award dated 06.04.1995 passed by the learned Reference Court, the present appeal being devoid dismissed. Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 05.03.2026 Whether speaking/reasoned? Whether Reportable? d of the determination made by the learned Reference Court, the appellants/ landowners sought reference under Section 18 of the Act, however, the same was dismissed by the learned Reference Court vide award dated 06.04.1995 for want of appellants/ landowners, to support their claim for decision of the learned Reference Court, preferred at the instance of appellants/ I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone book as well as records of the case. There is no evidence led by the appellants/ landowners in order to support their claim for enhancement of compensation. As per the records, sufficient opportunity was afforded to the appellants/landowners, however, they failed to produce any material on record. In such circumstances, finding no illegality or perversity with the award dated 06.04.1995 passed by the learned Reference Court, the present appeal being devoid of merit, is thus Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Yes/No d of the determination made by the learned Reference Court, the appellants/ landowners sought reference under Section 18 of the Act, however, the same was dismissed by the learned Reference Court vide award dated 06.04.1995 for want of appellants/ landowners, to support their claim for the learned Reference Court, appellants/ he parties and gone There is no evidence led by the appellants/ landowners in order to support their claim for enhancement of compensation. As per o the appellants/landowners, however, they failed to produce any material on record. In such circumstances, finding no illegality or perversity with the award dated 06.04.1995 passed by the learned of merit, is thus Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) SANJAY GUPTA 2026.03.06 15:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document