Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
111 IN TH
Smt. Lachhm
State of Har
CORAM:
Present:
HARKESH
appeal pref (for short “ 01.06.1998 (hereinafte of compens [2]
landowner(s Kalan, Tehs dated 26.12 1894 Act re of a road l Award No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR
RFA
Date achhmi and another
Versus
of Haryana through Collector, Karnal
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HAR
Mr. Nischal Chetanya Mancha
Mr. Devyansh, Advocate
Mr. Akash Chaudhary, Advoca
Mr. Vipul Thakur, Advocate
for the appellants-landowners
Mr. Abhinash Jain, Deputy Adv
for the respondent. ****
KESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)
The appellants-landowners, preferred under Section 54 of the L hort “1894 Act”), are seeking modi .1998 passed by the learned Additio inafter to be referred as “Reference pensation amount. Briefly stating, some land ow wner(s) situated within the revenue , Tehsil & District Karnal, came to be 26.12.1986 & 02.03.1987 issued und Act respectively, for the public purpos ad leading from Village Rasulpur No. 57, dated 14.03.1989, the L
UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH RFA No. 590 of 1999 (O&M) Date of Decision: 27.04.2026
...Appellants arnal
...Respondent HARKESH MANUJA nchanda, Advocate with dvocate and ners. ty Advocate General, Haryana
ers, by instituting the present f the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 modification of the award dated Additional District Judge, Karnal rence Court”) for enhancement nd owned by the appellant(s)- enue estate of Village Rasulpur to be acquired vide notifications ed under Sections 4 and 6 of the purpose namely “for construction lpur to Village Dabarki”. Vide the Land Acquisition Collector,
DINESH KUMAR 2026.05.04 11:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
RFA No. 590 of 1999 (O&M) -2- Ambala Cantt. (for short “LAC’) awarded compensation Rs. 90,000/- for Chahi land; Rs. 2,531.25 for Gair Mumkin Chahi land; while awarding Rs. 1,44,383.45 for the total land. [3]
Aggrieved of the aforesaid Award dated 14.03.1989, landowners / interested persons filed reference under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, which was disposed of vide decision dated 01.06.1998 passed by the learned Reference Court, while awarding double the amount of compensation qua the area comprised in killa No. 19/1 of Rect. No. 24 belonging to the appellants besides statutory benefits. Dissatisfied with the aforesaid decision dated 01.06.1998, the present appeal has been preferred at the instance of appellants-landowners. [4]
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book/relevant record.
[5]
The only grouse raised on behalf of the appellants- landowners is that they have been illegally deprived of the interest on the statutory benefits provided under Section 23 (1-A) as well as Section 23 (2) of the 1894 Act. [6]
It is not in dispute that neither any cross-appeal nor cross-objections were filed at the instance of respondent(s)-State of Haryana, assailing the award passed by the learned Reference Court. [7]
Considering the fact that the notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act in the case in hand was issued on 26.12.1986 and the award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act was passed by the LAC on 14.03.1989, which was post amendment carried out in terms of Act No. 68 of 1984 [Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984], and came into force with effect from 24.09.1984, as such, the appellants- landowners were entitled for award of interest in terms of Section 34 DINESH KUMAR 2026.05.04 11:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
RFA No. 590 of 1999 (O&M) -3- of the 1894 Act upon the statutory benefits provided under the aforesaid two provisions of Section 23 (1-A) and Section 23(2) of the 1894 Act, which are statutory components of compensation. [8]
Consequently, the award dated 01.06.1998 passed by the learned Reference Court is modified to the extent that the appellants-landowners shall be entitled for interest provided under Section 34 of the 1894 Act upon the statutory benefits provided under the aforesaid two provisions of Section 23 (1-A) and Section 23 (2) of the 1894 Act. [9]
Also, wherever the landowner(s) has/have unfortunately died in the appeal(s) / cross-objection(s) after filing thereof and the legal representatives have not been impleaded, they shall be at liberty to seek execution of the present decision by moving appropriate application(s) before the learned Executing Court. [10] Appeal is disposed of. [11] Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand(s) disposed off.
April 27, 2026
( HARKESH MANUJA ) ‘dk kamra’
JUDGE
DINESH KUMAR 2026.05.04 11:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document