-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH *** 106 RFA-739-1996 (O&M) Date of Decision: 06.07.2026 KANWAR LAL & ANOTHER …Appellants Versus LAND ACQUSITION COLLECTOR & ANOTHER …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- None for appellants Mr. Abhinash Jain, Additional Advocate General, Haryana *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1. The appellants through instant appeal are seeking modification of award dated 07.12.1995 whereby learned Additional District Judge, Rewari (hereinafter called as ‘Reference Court’) has not awarded claimed amount of compensation. 2. The State Government issued notification dated 22.01.1991 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘1894 Act’) for acquisition of 2 Kanal 13 Marla of land situated within the revenue estate of village Kosli, District Rewari with intent to construct a road. The said notification was followed by notification dated 24.09.1991 issued under Section 6 of 1894 Act. 3. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘Collector’) in terms of provisions of 1894 Act, determined compensation payable to landowners. SUDEEPAK KUMAR 2026.07.07 16:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document -2- Market value of the acquired land was determined as ₹1 lakh per acre. Landowners were held entitled to solatium and other statutory benefits. Feeling dis-satisfied from aforesaid award, landowners preferred petitions before the Collector which were referred to Court under Section 18 of the 1894 Act. 4. The landowners as well as State, in support of their contentions, led their evidence. The State attempted to justify market value determined by Collector, however, landowners vehemently pleaded that value of their land has been assessed on lower side. 5. The Reference Court, appreciating evidence led by both sides, adjudicated the petition. The Reference Court has assessed market value of acquired land ₹50 per sq. yard. In this way, the Reference Court has enhanced market value from ₹1 lakh per acre (determined by Collector) to ₹50 per sq. yard. The landowners are in appeal before this Court. 6. The matter was called twice but none has entered appearance on behalf of the appellants. Matter is pending before this Court since 1996. It appears that with the efflux of time, appellants have lost their interest to pursue the matter. 7. Dismissed for non-prosecution. 8. Pending Misc. application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 06.07.2026 SDK Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No SUDEEPAK KUMAR 2026.07.07 16:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document