RFA-3464 124 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA State of Niranjan Singh CORAM: Present: HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) Appeals, details of which are given in the footnote of this judgment, are being decided as all the appeals have arisen out of common acquisition/Award involving common facts and question of law. For the sake of brevity, facts are being taken 2. laid to the decision dated Additional District Judge, 3. revenue estate of Ambala, 3464-1999 (O&M) & other connected cases IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** RFA Date of Decision: State of Haryana Versus Niranjan Singh CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr.Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana for the appellants. Mr. R.S. Mamli, Advocate for the respondents/ landowners. --- HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) Vide this common order, a bunch of Appeals, details of which are given in the footnote of this judgment, are being decided as all the appeals have arisen out of common acquisition/Award involving common facts and question of law. For the sake of brevity, facts are being taken By way of filing the present appeal(s) challenge has been laid to the decision dated 08.12.1998 Additional District Judge, Ambala-cum Briefly stating, 1.96 acres of land revenue estate of Village Dharala, HB No. 159, Tehsil and District , was sought to be acquired by the Government of 1999 (O&M) & other connected cases [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA-3464-1999 (O&M) Date of Decision: 27.01.2026 …….Appellant Versus ..….Respondent HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana Mr. R.S. Mamli, Advocate for the respondents/ landowners. Vide this common order, a bunch of 12 Regular First Appeals, details of which are given in the footnote of this judgment, are being decided as all the appeals have arisen out of common acquisition/Award involving common facts and question of law. For the sake of brevity, facts are being taken from RFA No.3464-1999. way of filing the present appeal(s) challenge has been 08.12.1998 passed by the learned cum-Reference Court. 1.96 acres of land, situated within the Village Dharala, HB No. 159, Tehsil and District was sought to be acquired by the Government of Haryana Regular First Appeals, details of which are given in the footnote of this judgment, are being decided as all the appeals have arisen out of common acquisition/Award involving common facts and question of law. For . way of filing the present appeal(s) challenge has been passed by the learned , situated within the Village Dharala, HB No. 159, Tehsil and District Haryana SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.05 14:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-3464 vide notifications dated 21.08.1989 (published on 22.08.1989) 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short ‘the Act’ r public purpose, namely, Shamalkha with links to Akbarpur in Ambala District Acquisition Collector (f 26.02.1990 Rs.40,000/ land, Rs.13,000/ gair mumkin 4. landowners Act, which came to be disposed of by the learned Reference Court vide decision dated the acquired land @ Rs. Rs.1,00,000/ statutory benefits under the Act. 5. the present appeals were preferred at the instance of 6. through the paper 7. Court awarded market value @ Rs.48,000/ 3464-1999 (O&M) & other connected cases vide notifications dated 23.07.1988 (published on 23.08.1988) and 21.08.1989 (published on 22.08.1989) 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short ‘the Act’ r public purpose, namely, for ‘construction of Shamalkha with links to Akbarpur in Ambala District Acquisition Collector (for short ‘the LAC’) vide award 26.02.1990 assessed market value in respect of the acquired land @ 40,000/- per acre for Chahi land, Rs.26,000/ , Rs.13,000/- per acre for Banjar land umkin land, besides all other statutory benefits under the Act. Dissatisfied with the aforesaid award, the appellants/ landowners preferred reference petitions invoking Section 18 of the Act, which came to be disposed of by the learned Reference Court vide decision dated 08.12.1998 while determining the market value of the acquired land @ Rs.48,000/- Rs.1,00,000/- per acre for gair mumkin land, statutory benefits under the Act. Aggrieved of the decision of the present appeals were preferred at the instance of I have heard learned counsel for the parties an through the paper-book. A perusal of the record shows that the learned Reference awarded market value @ Rs.48,000/ 1999 (O&M) & other connected cases [2] 23.07.1988 (published on 23.08.1988) and 21.08.1989 (published on 22.08.1989), issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short ‘the Act’ respectively, for construction of link road Dharala to Shamalkha with links to Akbarpur in Ambala District’. The Land or short ‘the LAC’) vide award No.23 dated assessed market value in respect of the acquired land @ , Rs.26,000/- per acre for Barani land and Rs.6,500/- per acre for other statutory benefits under the Act. 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 while determining the market value of per acre for chahi land and er acre for gair mumkin land, besides all other decision of the learned Reference Court, the present appeals were preferred at the instance of State. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone A perusal of the record shows that the learned Reference awarded market value @ Rs.48,000/- per acre primarily while 23.07.1988 (published on 23.08.1988) and issued under Sections 4 and espectively, for link road Dharala to The Land No.23 dated assessed market value in respect of the acquired land @ per acre for Barani per acre for other statutory benefits under the Act. 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 while determining the market value of and besides all other the learned Reference Court, d gone A perusal of the record shows that the learned Reference per acre primarily while SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.05 14:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-3464 relying upon sale deed Ex.P3 dated of land was sold for a sum of Rs.1500/ Rs.48,000/ case, the sale deed Ex. under Section 4 of the Act is appreciation @ 8% per annum is required to be awarded for the time gap. Ex.P3 pertained to a small parcel of land measuring 5 marla, a suitable cut of 1/3 would have come to Rs.53547/ 8. was to be made presented which 2K Village Dharala was sold for a sum of Rs.13,000/ per acre was Rs.39,245/ annum for the time gap between the sale instance i.e. 08.04.1986 up to the date of publication of notification Section 4 of the Act in the case in hand Rs.49,841/ assessed by the learned Reference Court 9. award dated 08.12.1998 passed by learned Reference Court, 3464-1999 (O&M) & other connected cases relying upon sale deed Ex.P3 dated 0 of land was sold for a sum of Rs.1500/ Rs.48,000/-. However, it may be noticed here case, the sale deed Ex.P3 dated 0 under Section 4 of the Act is dated 23.07.1988 and a appreciation @ 8% per annum is required to be awarded for the time gap. Further, taking into account the fact that the sale instance Ex.P3 pertained to a small parcel of land measuring 5 marla, a suitable cut of 1/3rd towards smallness would have come to Rs.53547/- per acre Furthermore, even if the assessment of the market value was to be made on the basis of evidence led by the respondents presented in the form of sale deed Ex.R2 dated 08.04.1986 vide which 2K-13M of land forming part of the same revenue estate of Village Dharala was sold for a sum of Rs.13,000/ per acre was Rs.39,245/-; upon application of num for the time gap between the sale instance i.e. 08.04.1986 up to the date of publication of notification Section 4 of the Act in the case in hand 841/-, which does not differ significantly from assessed by the learned Reference Court In view of the above, no interference is called for in the award dated 08.12.1998 passed by learned Reference Court, 1999 (O&M) & other connected cases [3] 08.02.1980 vide which 5 marlas of land was sold for a sum of Rs.1500/- with base price per acre @ may be noticed here that in the present 08.02.1980 and the notification 23.07.1988 and as such suitable appreciation @ 8% per annum is required to be awarded for the said Further, taking into account the fact that the sale instance Ex.P3 pertained to a small parcel of land measuring 5 marla, a towards smallness of land was applied, the price per acre. if the assessment of the market value on the basis of evidence led by the respondents in the form of sale deed Ex.R2 dated 08.04.1986 vide 13M of land forming part of the same revenue estate of Village Dharala was sold for a sum of Rs.13,000/- and the base price upon application of appreciation @ 8% per num for the time gap between the sale instance i.e. 08.04.1986 up to the date of publication of notification dated 23.07.1988 under Section 4 of the Act in the case in hand, the price per acre comes to , which does not differ significantly from the market value assessed by the learned Reference Court. In view of the above, no interference is called for in the award dated 08.12.1998 passed by learned Reference Court, marlas with base price per acre @ in the present 8.02.1980 and the notification suitable said Further, taking into account the fact that the sale instance Ex.P3 pertained to a small parcel of land measuring 5 marla, a of land was applied, the price if the assessment of the market value on the basis of evidence led by the respondents in the form of sale deed Ex.R2 dated 08.04.1986 vide 13M of land forming part of the same revenue estate of and the base price appreciation @ 8% per num for the time gap between the sale instance i.e. 08.04.1986 up under , the price per acre comes to the market value In view of the above, no interference is called for in the award dated 08.12.1998 passed by learned Reference Court, SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.05 14:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-3464 whereby the market value was enhanced to Rs.48,000/ besides all the appeals 10. disposed of. 27.01.2026 sanjay Sr. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 27.01.2026 sanjay 3464-1999 (O&M) & other connected cases whereby the market value was enhanced to Rs.48,000/ besides all other benefits as provided under the Act. Consequently, appeals filed by the appellant State Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. .01.2026 Whether speaking/reasoned? Whether Reportable? Sr. No. Case No. 1. RFA-3465-1999 (O&M) 2. RFA-3466-1999 (O&M) 3. RFA-3467-1999 (O&M) 4. RFA-3470-1999 (O&M) 5. RFA-3471-1999 (O&M) 6. RFA-3472-1999 (O&M) 7. RFA-3566-1999 (O&M) 8. RFA-3469-1999 (O&M) 9. RFA-3474-1999 (O&M) 10. RFA-3468-1999 (O&M) 11. RFA-3473-1999 (O&M) .01.2026 1999 (O&M) & other connected cases [4] whereby the market value was enhanced to Rs.48,000/- per acre, other benefits as provided under the Act. Consequently, State are hereby dismissed. Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Yes/No 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) 1999 (O&M) (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE per acre, other benefits as provided under the Act. Consequently, Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.05 14:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document