RFA-1582 108 (14 cases) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Nirmal Singh and others State of CORAM: Present: HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) Appeals 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 -2000. 2. 1582-2000 (O&M) & other connected cases cases) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** RFA Date of Decision: Nirmal Singh and others Versus State of Haryana CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. Bhag Singh, Advocate Mr. Lekh Raj Nandal, Advocate Mr.Arvinder Arora, Advocate and Mr. Govind Arora, Advocate for the landowners. Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana -.- HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) Vide this common order, a bunch of and two XOBJRs, 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 By way of filing the present appeal(s) challenge has been 2000 (O&M) & other connected cases [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA-1582-2000 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.02.2026 …….Appellants Versus ..….Respondent HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Bhag Singh, Advocate Mr. Lekh Raj Nandal, Advocate Mr.Arvinder Arora, Advocate and Mr. Govind Arora, Advocate Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana. Vide this common order, a bunch of 14 Regular First , 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.1582 way of filing the present appeal(s) challenge has been Regular First , 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 1582 way of filing the present appeal(s) challenge has been SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1582 laid to the decision dated Additional District Judge, Reference Court’) 3. Acquisition Act, three revenue estate of Villages Tehsil Naraingarh, Distr (published on 08.07.1986) of the Act, followed by notification 11.02.1987 (published on 16.02.1987) for the public purpose, namely, ‘ Village Majri Road’ Acquisition Collector, for short ‘LAC’ on 31.07.1987, whereby the market value for the three different revenue estates was determined to the following effect: 1582-2000 (O&M) & other connected cases laid to the decision dated 30.09.1999 Additional District Judge, Amabla (hereinafter referred Reference Court’). Briefly stating, notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short ‘the Act’, relating to acquisition from three revenue estate of Villages Hussaini, Rampur and Jangu Majra, Naraingarh, District Ambala was issued on 24.06.1986 (published on 08.07.1986) of the Act, followed by notification 11.02.1987 (published on 16.02.1987) for the public purpose, namely, ‘for construction of Naraingarh to Village Majri Road’. Award under Section 11 was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector, for short ‘LAC’ on 31.07.1987, whereby the market value for the three different revenue estates was determined to the following effect:- “VILLAGE HUSSAINI Sr. No. Nature of Land 1. Chahi Land 2. Barani and Lalhira Darakhtan Land 3. Gair Mumkin land VILLAGE RAMPUR Sr. No. Nature of Land 1. Chahi Land 2. Barani Land 2000 (O&M) & other connected cases [2] 30.09.1999 passed by the learned Amabla (hereinafter referred to as ‘the notification under Section 4 of the Land 1894, for short ‘the Act’, relating to acquisition from Hussaini, Rampur and Jangu Majra, ict Ambala was issued on 24.06.1986 (published on 08.07.1986) of the Act, followed by notification 11.02.1987 (published on 16.02.1987) issued under Section 6 thereof for construction of Naraingarh to ward under Section 11 was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector, for short ‘LAC’ on 31.07.1987, whereby the market value for the three different revenue estates was determined Market value (per acre) Rs.27680/- Barani and Lalhira Rs.18400/- Gair Mumkin land Rs.4640/- Market value (per acre) Rs.35040/- Rs.23360/- passed by the learned to as ‘the notification under Section 4 of the Land 1894, for short ‘the Act’, relating to acquisition from Hussaini, Rampur and Jangu Majra, ict Ambala was issued on 24.06.1986 (published on 08.07.1986) of the Act, followed by notification issued under Section 6 thereof for construction of Naraingarh to ward under Section 11 was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector, for short ‘LAC’ on 31.07.1987, whereby the market value for the three different revenue estates was determined (per acre) Market value (per acre) SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1582 4. objections under Section 18 of the Act which learned Reference Court vide award dated 31.03.1987, with the following determination 5. instance of appellants/ landowners as well as respondent State. 6. the appellants/ landowners submits that the learned Reference Court went wrong having discarded the award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) passed by the learned Reference Court in proceeding which commenced vide notification dated pertaining to the land forming part of the revenue estate of Village Naraingarh, wherein the 1582-2000 (O&M) & other connected cases 3. Gair Mumkin land VILLAGE JANGU MAJRA Sr. No. Nature of Land 1. Chahi Land 2. Gair Mumkin Land Aggrieved thereof, the appellants/ landowners filed objections under Section 18 of the Act which learned Reference Court vide award dated 31.03.1987, with the following determination at a uniform rate “VILLAGE HUSSAINI Rs.375/- per marla (Rs.60,000/ VILLAGE RAMPUR Rs.2000/- per marla (Rs.3,20,000/ VILLAGE JANGU MAJRA Rs.2000/- per marla (Rs.3,20,000/ Still aggrieved, the present appeals have been filed at the instance of appellants/ landowners as well as respondent State. Impugning the aforementioned award, learned counsel for the appellants/ landowners submits that the learned Reference Court went wrong having discarded the award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) passed by the learned Reference Court in proceeding which commenced vide notification dated pertaining to the land forming part of the revenue estate of Village Naraingarh, wherein the purpose of acquisition was the same i.e. 2000 (O&M) & other connected cases [3] Mumkin land Rs.5760/- Market value (per acre) Rs.28000/- Gair Mumkin Land Rs.4640/- Aggrieved thereof, the appellants/ landowners filed objections under Section 18 of the Act which were decided by the learned Reference Court vide award dated 31.03.1987, with the at a uniform rate:- VILLAGE HUSSAINI per marla (Rs.60,000/- per acre) per marla (Rs.3,20,000/- per acre) VILLAGE JANGU MAJRA per marla (Rs.3,20,000/- per acre)” Still aggrieved, the present appeals have been filed at the instance of appellants/ landowners as well as respondent State. Impugning the aforementioned award, learned counsel for the appellants/ landowners submits that the learned Reference Court went wrong having discarded the award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) passed by the learned Reference Court in an earlier acquisition proceeding which commenced vide notification dated 29.06.1986 pertaining to the land forming part of the revenue estate of Village purpose of acquisition was the same i.e. Market value (per acre) Aggrieved thereof, the appellants/ landowners filed were decided by the learned Reference Court vide award dated 31.03.1987, with the Still aggrieved, the present appeals have been filed at the Impugning the aforementioned award, learned counsel for the appellants/ landowners submits that the learned Reference Court went wrong having discarded the award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) earlier acquisition 29.06.1986 pertaining to the land forming part of the revenue estate of Village for SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1582 construction of known as ‘ appellants/ landowners the landowners from the revenue estate of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra, they were granted market value @ Rs.3 acre while relying upon the award date with all other statutory benefits under the Act and respect to the market value regarding acquired land of Village Hussaini required to be accorded. assessment of market value for the acquired land pertaining to the other two revenue estates of Village Rampur and Jangu Majra, expect for praying that the same were not required to be reduced in the appeals 7. of the respondent State submits that once the sale instances Exs.P1 to P3 pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Hussaini were available on reco (Ex.P4) pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Naraingarh was liable to be ignored. He also points out that the learned Reference Court erred in favour 1582-2000 (O&M) & other connected cases construction of ‘Link Road Naraingarh to Ujra Majra Road known as ‘Naraingarh to Village Majri Road appellants/ landowners further submits that in the cases pertaining to the landowners from the revenue estate of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra, they were granted market value @ Rs.3 acre while relying upon the award date with all other statutory benefits under the Act and respect to the market value regarding acquired land of Village Hussaini which was rather abutting Naraingarh, required to be accorded. Further, no argument was assessment of market value for the acquired land pertaining to the other two revenue estates of Village Rampur and Jangu Majra, expect for praying that the same were not required to be reduced in the appeals preferred at the instance of respondent On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent State submits that once the sale instances Exs.P1 to P3 pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Hussaini were available on record, the Reference Court award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Naraingarh was liable to be ignored. He also points out that the learned Reference erred having awarded market value @ Rs.3.20 lakhs per acre in favour of the landowners for the of two revenue estates of Village 2000 (O&M) & other connected cases [4] Link Road Naraingarh to Ujra Majra Road (commonly Naraingarh to Village Majri Road’). Learned counsel for the submits that in the cases pertaining to the landowners from the revenue estate of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra, they were granted market value @ Rs.3.20 lakhs per acre while relying upon the award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) along with all other statutory benefits under the Act and therefore, with respect to the market value regarding acquired land of Village which was rather abutting Naraingarh, the same benefit was was advanced concerning the assessment of market value for the acquired land pertaining to the other two revenue estates of Village Rampur and Jangu Majra, expect for praying that the same were not required to be reduced in preferred at the instance of respondent-State. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent State submits that once the sale instances Exs.P1 to P3 pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Hussaini were rd, the Reference Court award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Naraingarh was liable to be ignored. He also points out that the learned Reference having awarded market value @ Rs.3.20 lakhs per acre of two revenue estates of Village (commonly rned counsel for the submits that in the cases pertaining to the landowners from the revenue estate of Villages Rampur and 20 lakhs per d 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) along with respect to the market value regarding acquired land of Village the same benefit was the assessment of market value for the acquired land pertaining to the other two revenue estates of Village Rampur and Jangu Majra, expect for praying that the same were not required to be reduced in On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent State submits that once the sale instances Exs.P1 to P3 pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Hussaini were rd, the Reference Court award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Naraingarh was liable to be ignored. He also points out that the learned Reference having awarded market value @ Rs.3.20 lakhs per acre of two revenue estates of Village SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1582 Rampur and Jangu Majra while relying upon the previous award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4), especially on record to establish the geographical estate of Village Naraingarh Majra. Learned State counsel thus submits that the market value with respect to the revenue estate of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra were required to be re available on record while ignoring the previous award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) and the same was thus liable to be reduced accordingly. 8. through the paper behalf of the appellants/ landowners. 9. revenue estate of Village Hussaini, estate of Village Hussaini abuts learned Reference Court has recorded a positive finding that Stand, Naraingarh is at a distance of merely ½ killa from the acquired land of Village Hussaini. Village Hus aforesaid been recorded in paragraph 13 of the Reference Court award being relevant, 1582-2000 (O&M) & other connected cases Rampur and Jangu Majra while relying upon the previous award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4), especially on record to establish the geographical estate of Village Naraingarh viz-a-viz Majra. Learned State counsel thus submits that the market value with respect to the revenue estate of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra were required to be re-assessed on the basis of available on record while ignoring the previous award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) and the same was thus liable to be reduced accordingly. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book. I find substance in the submis behalf of the appellants/ landowners. DETERMINATION W.R.T. From perusal of the record in revenue estate of Village Hussaini, estate of Village Hussaini abuts and adjoins Village Naraingarh learned Reference Court has recorded a positive finding that Stand, Naraingarh is at a distance of merely ½ killa from the acquired land of Village Hussaini. It has also been recorded that Village Hussaini has great potential value. The findings to the aforesaid been recorded in paragraph 13 of the Reference Court award being relevant, are extracted hereunder: 2000 (O&M) & other connected cases [5] Rampur and Jangu Majra while relying upon the previous award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4), especially when no material was available on record to establish the geographical proximity of the revenue viz Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra. Learned State counsel thus submits that the market value with respect to the revenue estate of Villages Rampur and Jangu assessed on the basis of material available on record while ignoring the previous award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) and the same was thus liable to be reduced I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone I find substance in the submissions made on DETERMINATION W.R.T. VILLAGE HUSSAINI From perusal of the record in the appeal(s), related to the revenue estate of Village Hussaini, it is evident that the revenue and adjoins Village Naraingarh. The learned Reference Court has recorded a positive finding that the Bus Stand, Naraingarh is at a distance of merely ½ killa from the acquired It has also been recorded that the land of saini has great potential value. The findings to the aforesaid been recorded in paragraph 13 of the Reference Court extracted hereunder:- Rampur and Jangu Majra while relying upon the previous award was available revenue Jangu Majra. Learned State counsel thus submits that the market value with respect to the revenue estate of Villages Rampur and Jangu material available on record while ignoring the previous award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) and the same was thus liable to be reduced I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone sions made on to the revenue . The the Bus Stand, Naraingarh is at a distance of merely ½ killa from the acquired the land of saini has great potential value. The findings to the aforesaid been recorded in paragraph 13 of the Reference Court SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1582 award relating to the revenue estate of Village Hussaini, have not been challenged by the respondent cross-appeals or conclusive 10. 1582-2000 (O&M) & other connected cases “13. From the evidence referred /and mentioned above and from these two notifications this f becomes apparent on file that village Naraingarh adjoins with village Hussaini and the village Majri is also not at a more distance from Hussaini. There is lot of difference in the rates of the land acquired vide these two different notifications. The development of Naraingarh definitely has a prospective effect on the development of the adjoining village. Village Hussaini is just adjoining to Naraingarh. The Bus stand Naraingarh is at a distance of half Killa from acquired land of village Hussaini, and offices situated in Naraingarh Town are also adjoining. So the Land of Hussaini has a great potentiality about the prices comparatively given by the land acquisition Collector which are much on the lower side. So taking into account the future potentiality of village Hussaini which is a proximity of Naraingarh town, it is a fit case for enhancing the marketing value of the acquired land. The prices given for the acquired land of village Hussaini are a through away prices being on very lower side.” The aforesaid findings recorded in the reference relating to the revenue estate of Village Hussaini, have not been challenged by the respondent appeals or any cross-objections. conclusive and final are binding. Furthermore, a perusal of the previous award passed by 2000 (O&M) & other connected cases [6] From the evidence referred /and mentioned above and from these two notifications this fact becomes apparent on file that village Naraingarh adjoins with village Hussaini and the village Majri is also not at a more distance from Hussaini. There is lot of difference in the rates of the land acquired vide these two different notifications. development of Naraingarh definitely has a prospective effect on the development of the adjoining village. Village Hussaini is just adjoining to Naraingarh. The Bus stand Naraingarh is at a distance of half Killa from acquired land of village Hussaini, and other offices situated in Naraingarh Town are also adjoining. So the Land of Hussaini has a great potentiality about the prices comparatively given by the land acquisition Collector which are much on the lower side. So taking into account the tiality of village Hussaini which is a proximity of Naraingarh town, it is a fit case for enhancing the marketing value of the acquired land. The prices given for the acquired land of village Hussaini are a through away prices being on very lower side.” The aforesaid findings recorded in the reference Court relating to the revenue estate of Village Hussaini, have not been challenged by the respondent-State either by way of filing objections. The same thus being Furthermore, a perusal of the previous award passed by From the evidence referred /and mentioned act becomes apparent on file that village Naraingarh adjoins with village Hussaini and the village Majri is also not at a more distance from Hussaini. There is lot of difference in the rates of the land acquired vide these two different notifications. development of Naraingarh definitely has a prospective effect on the development of the adjoining village. Village Hussaini is just adjoining to Naraingarh. The Bus stand Naraingarh is at a distance of half Killa from other offices situated in Naraingarh Town are also adjoining. So the Land of Hussaini has a great potentiality about the prices comparatively given by the land acquisition Collector which are much on the lower side. So taking into account the tiality of village Hussaini which is a proximity of Naraingarh town, it is a fit case for enhancing the marketing value of the acquired land. The prices given for the acquired land of village Hussaini are a through away prices being Court relating to the revenue estate of Village Hussaini, have not either by way of filing The same thus being Furthermore, a perusal of the previous award passed by SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1582 the learned Reference Court dated the acquisition in the said case was for the same public purpose, namely, for construction of link Road from as has been admitted from Mr. Virender Singh, SDE, PWD (B&R), Naraingarh. The record further shows that the acquisition in the case commenced vide notification dated revenue estates of Village Hussaini, Rampur and Jangu Majra, was also for the same public purpose, namely, Naraingarh to Village Majri Road with the acquisition initiate relating to the award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4). admitted by learned State counsel, on instructions from Singh, SDE, PWD (B&R), Naraingarh present case was in fact for widening of already existing consolidation path which further adds to the potential of the acquired land, the same being located on the 11. purpose for acquisition of the land under two notifications dated 29.06.1986 and 08.07.1986 was same i.e. Road leading from Naraingarh to Ujra Majra ‘Naraingarh 1582-2000 (O&M) & other connected cases the learned Reference Court dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) shows that the acquisition in the said case was for the same public purpose, namely, for construction of link Road from has been admitted by the learned State counsel on instructions from Mr. Virender Singh, SDE, PWD (B&R), Naraingarh. The record further shows that the acquisition in the case commenced vide notification dated revenue estates of Village Hussaini, Rampur and Jangu Majra, was lso for the same public purpose, namely, Naraingarh to Village Majri Road and thus in fact was in continuity with the acquisition initiated vide notification dated 29.06.1986 relating to the award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4). Rather, during the course of arguments, it has admitted by learned State counsel, on instructions from Singh, SDE, PWD (B&R), Naraingarh present case was in fact for widening of already existing consolidation path which further adds to the potential of the acquired land, the same being located on the already existing path Thus, once it was established on record tha purpose for acquisition of the land under two notifications dated 29.06.1986 and 08.07.1986 was same i.e. Road leading from Naraingarh to Ujra Majra Naraingarh-Majra road’) and the fact that the acq 2000 (O&M) & other connected cases [7] 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) shows that the acquisition in the said case was for the same public purpose, namely, for construction of link Road from Naraingarh to Uraj Majra by the learned State counsel on instructions from Mr. Virender Singh, SDE, PWD (B&R), Naraingarh. The record further shows that the acquisition in the case(s) in hand which commenced vide notification dated 08.07.1986 pertaining to the revenue estates of Village Hussaini, Rampur and Jangu Majra, was lso for the same public purpose, namely, for constructions of and thus in fact was in continuity d vide notification dated 29.06.1986 relating to the award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4). uring the course of arguments, it has also been admitted by learned State counsel, on instructions from Mr. Virender Singh, SDE, PWD (B&R), Naraingarh that the acquisition in the present case was in fact for widening of already existing consolidation path which further adds to the potential of the acquired land, the already existing path. Thus, once it was established on record that the public purpose for acquisition of the land under two notifications dated 29.06.1986 and 08.07.1986 was same i.e. for construction of Link Road leading from Naraingarh to Ujra Majra (commonly known as ’) and the fact that the acquired land forming 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) shows that the acquisition in the said case was for the same public purpose, Naraingarh to Uraj Majra, by the learned State counsel on instructions from Mr. Virender Singh, SDE, PWD (B&R), Naraingarh. The record in hand which 08.07.1986 pertaining to the revenue estates of Village Hussaini, Rampur and Jangu Majra, was for constructions of and thus in fact was in continuity, d vide notification dated 29.06.1986 been Mr. Virender acquisition in the present case was in fact for widening of already existing consolidation path which further adds to the potential of the acquired land, the t the public purpose for acquisition of the land under two notifications dated for construction of Link (commonly known as uired land forming SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1582 part of revenue estate of Village Hussaini was just half acre from the Bus Stand of Naraingarh, besides being located near the other public offices of Naraingarh, it was wholly unjustified on the part of learned Reference Court to have ignored the award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) pertaining to the land acquired from th estate of Village Hussaini especially when it was established that both the continuity, just abutting each other 12. rather than relying upon the sale instances Ex.P1 to Ex.P3 special and exceptional circumstances, wherein the two land parcels were abutting and adjoining, rather than relying upon three sale deeds, i.e. Exs.P1 to P3, it was safe determination made by the learned Reference Court on its previous award dated and fair compensation in favour of the appellants/landowners. 13. Reference Court dated coordinate Bench of this Court vide its decision dated 13.11.2009, passed in Subhash Chand and another Vs. State of value was further enhanced to Rs.2300/ 14. 1582-2000 (O&M) & other connected cases part of revenue estate of Village Hussaini was just half acre from the Bus Stand of Naraingarh, besides being located near the other public offices of Naraingarh, it was wholly unjustified on the part of learned Reference Court to have ignored the award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) pertaining to the land acquired from th estate of Village Hussaini especially when it was established that both the parcels of acquired land were continuity, just abutting each other and Taking into account the aforementione rather than relying upon the sale instances Ex.P1 to Ex.P3 special and exceptional circumstances, wherein the two land parcels were abutting and adjoining, rather than relying upon three sale deeds, i.e. Exs.P1 to P3, it was safe determination made by the learned Reference Court on its previous award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) so as to make assessment of just and fair compensation in favour of the appellants/landowners. It has also come on record that Reference Court dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) was further modified by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide its decision dated 13.11.2009, passed in RFA No.2970-1994 and other connected appeals, titled as Subhash Chand and another Vs. State of value was further enhanced to Rs.2300/ Accordingly, relying upon the same, the appellants/ 2000 (O&M) & other connected cases [8] part of revenue estate of Village Hussaini was just half acre away from the Bus Stand of Naraingarh, besides being located near the other public offices of Naraingarh, it was wholly unjustified on the part of learned Reference Court to have ignored the award dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) pertaining to the land acquired from the revenue estate of Village Hussaini especially when it was established that were even located geographically in and horizontally in one line. Taking into account the aforementioned circumstances, rather than relying upon the sale instances Ex.P1 to Ex.P3, in such special and exceptional circumstances, wherein the two land parcels were abutting and adjoining, rather than relying upon three sale deeds, i.e. Exs.P1 to P3, it was safe to place reliance upon the determination made by the learned Reference Court on its previous 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) so as to make assessment of just and fair compensation in favour of the appellants/landowners. It has also come on record that the award of the 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) was further modified by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide its decision dated 13.11.2009, and other connected appeals, titled as Subhash Chand and another Vs. State of Haryana, and the market value was further enhanced to Rs.2300/- per marla. Accordingly, relying upon the same, the appellants/ away from the Bus Stand of Naraingarh, besides being located near the other public offices of Naraingarh, it was wholly unjustified on the part of learned Reference Court to have ignored the award dated e revenue estate of Village Hussaini especially when it was established that located geographically in d circumstances, , in such special and exceptional circumstances, wherein the two land parcels were abutting and adjoining, rather than relying upon three sale to place reliance upon the determination made by the learned Reference Court on its previous 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) so as to make assessment of just the award of the 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) was further modified by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide its decision dated 13.11.2009, and other connected appeals, titled as and the market Accordingly, relying upon the same, the appellants/ SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1582 landowners pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Hussaini are held entitled for the award of marla besides award of other statutory benefits and interest especially interest on solatium. DETERMINATION W.E.T. MAJRA 15. appellants/ l 16. has been established that previous acquisition dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) Naraingarh, which commenced vide notification da under Section 4 of the Act three revenue estates of Village Hussaini, Rampur, Jangu Majra initiated vide notification dated 08.07.1986 happened to be for the same public of link road from Naraingarh to (Ujra Majra (commonly known as ‘Naraingarh Ujra Majra and the revenue estates on the said road and adjoining leading fro Jangu Majra. stretch of this road leading from Naraingarh to Jangu Majra 1582-2000 (O&M) & other connected cases landowners pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Hussaini are held entitled for the award of similar marla besides award of other statutory benefits and interest especially interest on solatium. DETERMINATION W.E.T. VILLAGES RAMPUR AND JANGU MAJRA The present appeal(s) have been preferred by both appellants/ landowners as well as respo From the discussion made in the preceding paragraphs has been established that previous acquisition dated 01.04.1994 (Ex.P4) pertained to the revenue estate of Village Naraingarh, which commenced vide notification da under Section 4 of the Act and the present acquisition relating to the three revenue estates of Village Hussaini, Rampur, Jangu Majra initiated vide notification dated 08.07.1986 happened to be for the same public purpose, namely, for construction of link road from Naraingarh to (Ujra Majra (commonly known as Naraingarh-Majra road’) in continuity; leading from Naraingarh to Ujra Majra and the revenue estates on the said road and adjoining leading from Naraingarh to Hussaini, then Rampur and Jangu Majra. Further, as per the respondents stretch of this road leading from Naraingarh to Jangu Majra 2000 (O&M) & other connected cases [9] landowners pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Hussaini are similar market value @ Rs.2300/- per marla besides award of other statutory benefits and interest VILLAGES RAMPUR AND JANGU The present appeal(s) have been preferred by both andowners as well as respondent-State. made in the preceding paragraphs has been established that previous acquisition relating to award to the revenue estate of Village Naraingarh, which commenced vide notification dated 29.06.1986 and the present acquisition relating to the three revenue estates of Village Hussaini, Rampur, Jangu Majra initiated vide notification dated 08.07.1986 under Section 4 of the Act purpose, namely, for construction of link road from Naraingarh to (Ujra Majra (commonly known as in continuity; leading from Naraingarh to Ujra Majra and the revenue estates on the said road were abutting m Naraingarh to Hussaini, then Rampur and s per the respondents themselves the total stretch of this road leading from Naraingarh to Jangu Majra has been landowners pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Hussaini are per marla besides award of other statutory benefits and interest VILLAGES RAMPUR AND JANGU The present appeal(s) have been preferred by both made in the preceding paragraphs, it relating to award to the revenue estate of Village ted 29.06.1986 and the present acquisition relating to the three revenue estates of Village Hussaini, Rampur, Jangu Majra under Section 4 of the Act, purpose, namely, for construction of link road from Naraingarh to (Ujra Majra (commonly known as in continuity; leading from Naraingarh to were abutting m Naraingarh to Hussaini, then Rampur and the total has been SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1582 of 4 kms. Admittedly, the revenue estates of Village Naraingarh and Hussaini are abutting and adjoining Village Hussaini in-turn abuts Rampur. 17. pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Hussaini are entitled for the same market value i.e. @ Rs.2300/ the fact that the revenue estates of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra are located 12% needs to be applied revenue estate of Village Hussaini and the Rs.2300/ thus rounded off to Rs.2000/ Rs.3,20,000/ Reference Court for the revenue estates of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra besides all other statutory benefits as provided under the Act. Thus, the award passed by the learned Reference Court, in relation to the revenue estate of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra warrants no interference 18. filed by the Village Hussaini instance of 1582-2000 (O&M) & other connected cases 4 kms. Admittedly, the revenue estates of Village Naraingarh and Hussaini are abutting and adjoining thereafter, the revenue estates of Hussaini abuts Rampur and then comes Jangu Majra which turn abuts Rampur. Having recorded that the reven pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Hussaini are entitled for the same market value i.e. @ Rs.2300/ the fact that the revenue estates of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra are located relatively farther from Naraingarh, 12% needs to be applied upon the market value assessed revenue estate of Village Hussaini and the Rs.2300/- per marla – (minus) 12% = Rs.2024/ thus rounded off to Rs.2000/- per marla with base price of Rs.3,20,000/- per acre, as already assessed by the learned Reference Court for the revenue estates of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra besides all other statutory benefits as provided under the Act. Thus, the award passed by the learned Reference Court, in relation to the revenue estate of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra warrants no interference. In view of the above, the filed by the appellants/ landowners Village Hussaini are partly allowed, whereas the instance of respondent State are hereby 2000 (O&M) & other connected cases [10] 4 kms. Admittedly, the revenue estates of Village Naraingarh and thereafter, the revenue estates of and then comes Jangu Majra which Having recorded that the revenue estate of landowners pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Hussaini are entitled for the same market value i.e. @ Rs.2300/- per marla, keeping in view the fact that the revenue estates of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra Naraingarh, a suitable deduction of the market value assessed for the revenue estate of Village Hussaini and the figure thus comes to (minus) 12% = Rs.2024/- per marla. The same per marla with base price of , as already assessed by the learned Reference Court for the revenue estates of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra besides all other statutory benefits as provided under the Act. Thus, the award passed by the learned Reference Court, in relation to the revenue estate of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra In view of the above, the appeals as well as XOBJ appellants/ landowners from the revenue estate of , whereas the appeals filed at the are hereby dismissed. However, with 4 kms. Admittedly, the revenue estates of Village Naraingarh and thereafter, the revenue estates of and then comes Jangu Majra which ue estate of landowners pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Hussaini are entitled for per marla, keeping in view the fact that the revenue estates of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra deduction of the thus comes to he same per marla with base price of , as already assessed by the learned Reference Court for the revenue estates of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra besides all other statutory benefits as provided under the Act. Thus, the award passed by the learned Reference Court, in relation to the revenue estate of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra appeals as well as XOBJRs m the revenue estate of filed at the with SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1582 respect to the landowners from the revenue estates of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra, the appeal any, by both the parties are dismissed. The landowners shall be entitled for all other statutory benefits and interest, including the interest on solatium as well. 19. unfortunately expired in the appeal(s)/ cross thereof and the legal heirs have not been impleaded, they shall be at liberty to seek execution of the present decision by moving appropriate application(s) before the learned Executin 20. disposed of. 20.02.2026 sanjay Sr. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 1582-2000 (O&M) & other connected cases respect to the landowners from the revenue estates of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra, the appeal any, by both the parties are dismissed. The landowners shall be entitled for all other statutory benefits and interest, including the interest on solatium as well. Further, wherever, the landowner(s) has/have unfortunately expired in the appeal(s)/ cross thereof and the legal heirs have not been impleaded, they shall be at liberty to seek execution of the present decision by moving appropriate application(s) before the learned Executin Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned? Whether Reportable? Sr. No. Case No. 1. RFA-409-2001 (O&M) 2. RFA-410-2001 (O&M) 3. RFA-5599-2009 (O&M) 4. RFA-5600-2009 (O&M) 5. RFA-5601-2009 (O&M) & OBJR-89-CI-2010 6. RFA-5602-2009 (O&M) 7. RFA-5603-2009 (O&M) & OBJR-90-CI-2010 8. RFA-672-2011 (O&M) 9. RFA-2714-2011 (O&M) 10. RFA-2715-2011 (O&M) 2000 (O&M) & other connected cases [11] respect to the landowners from the revenue estates of Villages Rampur and Jangu Majra, the appeals and the cross-objections, if any, by both the parties are dismissed. The landowners shall be entitled for all other statutory benefits and interest, including the Further, wherever, the landowner(s) has/have unfortunately expired in the appeal(s)/ cross-objection(s) after filing thereof and the legal heirs 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. Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Yes/No 2001 (O&M) 2001 (O&M) 2009 (O&M) 2009 (O&M) 2009 (O&M) & 2010 2009 (O&M) 2009 (O&M) & 2010 2011 (O&M) 2011 (O&M) 2011 (O&M) respect to the landowners from the revenue estates of Villages objections, if any, by both the parties are dismissed. The landowners shall be entitled for all other statutory benefits and interest, including the Further, wherever, the landowner(s) has/have objection(s) after filing thereof and the legal heirs have not been impleaded, they shall be at liberty to seek execution of the present decision by moving Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1582 11. 12. 13. 20.02.2026 sanjay 1582-2000 (O&M) & other connected cases 11. RFA-1583-2000 (O&M) 12. RFA-1584-2000 (O&M) 13. RFA-1585-2000 (O&M) 2026 2000 (O&M) & other connected cases [12] 2000 (O&M) 2000 (O&M) 2000 (O&M) (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE (HARKESH MANUJA) SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document