RFA-924 106 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Raj Kumar and another State of Punjab and another CORAM: Present: HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) laid to the decision dated Additional District Judge, Reference Court 2. Village Chhat, Tehsil Rajpur, Distr Government of Punjab vide notifications dated 02.05.1988 Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') for construction of (for short ‘the LAC’) assessed market value in respect of the acquired land @ Rs. under the Act 3 landowners filed which came to be disposed of by the learned Reference Court vide 924-1997 (O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** RFA Date of Decision: 20.01.2026 Raj Kumar and another Versus of Punjab and another CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH Present: None for the appellants. Mr.Gunjan Mehta, Addl.A.G., Punjab for the appellants. --- HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) By way of filing the present appeal challenge has been laid to the decision dated 09.12.1996 Additional District Judge, Patiala -cum Reference Court’. Briefly stating, 6 bighas 16 biswas of Village Chhat, Tehsil Rajpur, District Patiala, was acquired by the Government of Punjab vide notifications dated 02.05.1988 issued under Sections 4 Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') for the construction of ‘Bassi Distributory’. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘the LAC’) assessed market value in respect of the acquired land @ Rs.60,000/- per Killa, alongwith 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 Reference Court vide ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA-924-1997 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.01.2026 …….Appellants Versus ..….Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr.Gunjan Mehta, Addl.A.G., Punjab way of filing the present appeal challenge has been 09.12.1996 passed by the learned cum-Reference Court, for short ‘the 6 bighas 16 biswas of land, situated ict Patiala, was acquired by the Government of Punjab vide notifications dated 30.3.1988 and 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition the public purpose, namely, for The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘the LAC’) assessed market value in respect of the acquired alongwith 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 way of filing the present appeal challenge has been passed by the learned the land, situated in ict Patiala, was acquired by the and of the Land Acquisition public purpose, namely, for The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘the LAC’) assessed market value in respect of the acquired 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 SANJAY GUPTA 2026.01.21 19:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-924 decision dated acquired land @ per acre for barani land land. The landowners were held entitled to the compensation including market value of the land 12% additional amount Act. 4. Reference Court, the present appeal w appellants/ landowners 5. submits that the by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Dyal Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another on 26.08.2010. 6. landowners. 7. passed by (supra), Consequently 8. disposed of 20.01.2026 sanjay 924-1997 (O&M) [2] decision dated 09.12.1996, determin ired land @ Rs.1,00,000/- per acre for chahi per acre for barani land and Rs.55,000/ . The landowners were held entitled to the compensation including market value of the land as well as solatium @ 30% and 12% additional amount besides all other statutory benefits under the Still aggrieved of the Award passed by the learned Reference Court, the present appeal w appellants/ landowners. At the outset, learned counsel for the submits that the matter is squarely covered by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Dyal Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another on 26.08.2010. No one has chosen to appear on behalf of the appellants/ landowners. Since the matter is squarely covered by the judgment by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in (supra), therefore, this Court finds no reaso Consequently, the present appeal is dismissed All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 20.01.2026 Whether speaking/reasoned? Whether Reportable? ] 09.12.1996, determining the market value of the per acre for chahi land, Rs.83,500/ 55,000/-per acre for gair mumkin . The landowners were held entitled to the compensation as well as solatium @ 30% and besides all other statutory benefits under the ggrieved of the Award passed by the learned Reference Court, the present appeal was preferred at the instance of earned counsel for the respondent State covered by the judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in RFA No. 2627-1993, titled as Dyal Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, decided No one has chosen to appear on behalf of the appellants/ Since the matter is squarely covered by the judgment a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Dyal Singh’s case therefore, this Court finds no reason to differ with the same. appeal is dismissed in the same terms. All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Yes/No the market value of the , Rs.83,500/- per acre for gair mumkin . The landowners were held entitled to the compensation as well as solatium @ 30% and besides all other statutory benefits under the ggrieved of the Award passed by the learned preferred at the instance of respondent State by the judgment passed 1993, titled as , decided No one has chosen to appear on behalf of the appellants/ Since the matter is squarely covered by the judgment case n to differ with the same. All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) SANJAY GUPTA 2026.01.21 19:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document