106 (10 case IN TH State of Har Ajmer Singh CORAM: Present: HARKESH Application same are MAIN APP bearing RF 2723, 2724 acquisition are involve convenienc 1999. [2] appeal bea cases) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR RFA and Date of Haryana and another Versus Singh and others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HAR Mr. Abhinash Jain, Deputy Adv for the appellant(s) / State of Mr. B.S. Mamli, Advocate for the respondent(s)-landowne **** KESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) ation(s) for condonation of delay in In view of the reasons stated are allowed subject to all just excep APPEAL(S) This order shall dispose off RFA Nos. 2716, 2717, 2718, 2 , 2724 & 2725 of 1999, as the sa sition / award. Since the common involved in these appeals, ther nience, facts are being culled ou The appellants-State of Ha al bearing RFA No. 2716 of 1999 UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH RFA No. 2716 of 1999 (O&M) and “09” connected cases Date of Decision: 15.01.2026 ...Appellants ...Respondents HARKESH MANUJA ty Advocate General, Haryana e of Haryana. downer(s). lay in re-filing the appeal(s) stated in the application(s), the exceptions. se off the present ten appeals 718, 2719, 2720, 2721, 2722, he same arise out of common mon question of law and facts therefore, for the sake of ed out from RFA No. 2716 of of Haryana, by instituting the preferred under Section 54 DINESH KUMAR 2026.01.20 10:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
         -2-     of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “1894 Act”), is seeking setting aside of the award dated 30.07.1998 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Jagadhri (hereinafter to be referred as “Reference Court”) while restoring the Award passed by the Land Acquisition Collector (for short “LAC”). [3] Briefly, the facts are that in pursuance of Haryana Govt. Notifications dated 16.07.1984 & 10.09.1985 issued under Sections 4 & 6 of the 1894 Act respectively, some land owned by the respondents-landowners situated in the revenue estate of Village Jhaguri, was acquired. The public purpose for acquisition of the land was stated to be for construction of link road from Bendi Nagla Saidan via Jhaguri. The LAC, vide its Award dated 18.08.1986, assessed the market value of the acquired land @ Rs. 20,000/- per acre for Chahi land; Rs. 24,000/- per acre for Gair Mumkin Bara land; Rs.50,000/- per acre for Gair Mumkin Abadi land; Rs. 20,000/- per acre for Gair Mumkin Ghara Khad land; Rs. 20,000/- per acre for Ghair Mumkin School land; and Rs. 12,000/- per acre for Gair Mumkin Hadda Rori land. [4] Dissatisfied with the aforesaid Award, landowners / interested persons filed references under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, which were accepted / disposed off vide award dated 30.07.1998 by the learned Reference Court, while assessing the market value of acquired land at the rate of Rs. 42,000/- per acre for Chahi land and Rs. 70,000/- per acre for Gair Mumkin Abadi land alongwith other statutory benefits. DINESH KUMAR 2026.01.20 10:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
         -3-     [5] Aggrieved thereof, the appellants preferred the present appeals seeking restoration of the award passed by the LAC. [6] After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the paper-book / relevant record, no ground is made out to accept the prayer made on behalf of the appellant(s)- State of Haryana. [7] Based on the proper appreciation of the material evidence available on record in the form of sale deeds dated 03.06.1983 & 24.04.1984 (Exhibits P-1 & P-2 respectively), the market value for the Chahi land has been assessed to the tune of Rs. 42,000/- per acre. Similarly, having placed reliance upon the two sale deeds dated 30.08.1971 (Exhibits P-4 & P-5 respectively), the market value for the Gair Mumkin Abandi land had been assessed at the rate of Rs. 70,000/- per acre. The findings recorded by the learned Reference Court are based on the material evidence led by the respondents-landowners in the form of sale- deeds Exhibits P-1 to P-3 which all relate to the period prior to the notification dated 16.07.1984 under Section 4 of the 1894 Act in the case at hand. Rather the respondents-landowners have not been awarded any appreciation for the time gap between the sale instances Exhibits P-1 to P-5 upto the date of notification issued under Section 4 of the 1894 Act in the present cases. Moreover, as per learned counsel for the respondents-landowners, neither any cross-appeal nor any cross-objection has been preferred at the instance of respondents-landowners. DINESH KUMAR 2026.01.20 10:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
         -4-     [8] Consequently, in the considered opinion of this Court, the impugned award dated 30.07.1998 passed by the learned Reference Court is justified and, therefore, upheld. Resultantly, the present appeals being devoid of merits are hereby dismissed. [9] Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand(s) disposed off.
January 15, 2026 ( HARKESH MANUJA ) ‘dk kamra’ JUDGE

    
    DINESH KUMAR 2026.01.20 10:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document