1 109 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH STATE OF HARYANA LILA SINGH (DIED) THROUGH ITS LRS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Mohit Rana, Advocate for respondent(s). HARKESH MANUJA Vide this common order, a batch of 4 connected Regular First Appeals shall stand disposed of, details whereof are mentioned in the footnote of the judgment. For convenience, the facts are drawn from RFA-2286-2001. 2. By way of present judgment dated Judge, Gurgaon (for short ’Reference Court’) petition filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as (s)-landowner(s) allowed. 3. Briefly stating, revenue estate of Village acquired for the public purpose, namely, Bhondsi to Behlpa via 02.02.1981 issued under Sections 4 and 6 respectively of the Act. The RFA-2286-2001 (O&M) and other connected cases IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA-2286-2001 (O&M) and other connected cases Date of Decision: STATE OF HARYANA Versus LILA SINGH (DIED) THROUGH ITS LRS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Mohit Rana, Advocate for respondent(s). **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) Vide this common order, a batch of 4 connected Regular First Appeals shall stand disposed of, details whereof are mentioned in the footnote of the judgment. For convenience, the facts are drawn from 2001. By way of present appeal(s), challenge has been laid to the judgment dated 19.03.2001 passed by the learned Additional District Gurgaon (for short ’Reference Court’) petition filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 referred to as ‘the Act’) by the respondent landowner(s), seeking enhancement of compensation was Briefly stating, land measuring 6.43 revenue estate of Village Sehjawas, Tehsil cquired for the public purpose, namely, for Bhondsi to Behlpa via Sehjawas vide notifications dated issued under Sections 4 and 6 respectively of the Act. The and other connected cases IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH and other connected cases Date of Decision: February 20, 2026 ........Appellant ........Respondent HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Mohit Rana, Advocate for respondent(s). Vide this common order, a batch of 4 connected Regular First Appeals shall stand disposed of, details whereof are mentioned in the footnote of the judgment. For convenience, the facts are drawn from , challenge has been laid to the passed by the learned Additional District Gurgaon (for short ’Reference Court’) whereby the reference petition filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ‘the Act’) by the respondent , seeking enhancement of compensation was partly 6.43 acres, situated within the , Tehsil and District Gurgaon, was for construction of road from vide notifications dated 03.12.1980 and issued under Sections 4 and 6 respectively of the Act. The and other connected cases February 20, 2026 Vide this common order, a batch of 4 connected Regular First Appeals shall stand disposed of, details whereof are mentioned in the footnote of the judgment. For convenience, the facts are drawn from , challenge has been laid to the passed by the learned Additional District whereby the reference petition filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ‘the Act’) by the respondent partly , situated within the was road from and issued under Sections 4 and 6 respectively of the Act. The TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.02.27 16:12 I agree to specified portions of this document 2 RFA-2286-2001 (O&M) and other connected cases Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘LAC’) passed Award No.54G dated 05.03.1981 assessing the market value at the rate of Rs.9,000/- per acre for Chahi and Gair Mumkin Garhi Khad land, Rs.4,000/- per acre for Gair Mumkin Bundh land along with other statutory benefits. 4. Aggrieved of the aforesaid award, the landowners, sought reference under Section 18 of the Act pleading that the acquired land was situated within village abadi and in close proximity to Delhi Alwar road, and thus, the price thereof was not less than Rs.1,00,000/- per acre. 5. Upon notice, the same was contested by the appellant-State by way of filing written statement wherein it was pleaded that the value of the acquired land was rightly assessed by the LAC having taken into consideration the potential advantage attached to it as well as considering the prevailing rates at that time. 6. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by learned Reference Court vide order dated 30.09.1998:- “1. What was the market value of the acquired land at the time of publication of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act? OPP 2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to enhanced compensation. If so, to what extent? OPP 3. Relief.” 7. After considering the evidence, the learned Reference Court, vide award dated 19.03.2001 enhanced the amount of compensation to Rs.29,475/- per acre. 8. Aggrieved of the aforesaid award dated 19.03.2001 passed by the learned Reference Court, the appellant-State has filed the present appeal. TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.02.27 16:12 I agree to specified portions of this document 3 RFA-2286-2001 (O&M) and other connected cases 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book. I am unable to find substance in the submission made on behalf of the appellant-State. 10. A perusal of record shows that reliance has been placed by the learned Reference Court upon the sale dated 12.06.1979 (Ex.P-1) which related to the same revenue estate of village Sehjawas. Vide this sale deed, 19 marlas of land was sold for Rs.3500/- and the base price thereof per acre was Rs.29,475/-. The sole contention raised on behalf of the appellant-State is that the sale exemplar Ex. P-2 though, pertaining to the same revenue estate of village Sehjawas pertained to a small piece of land measuring 19 marlas whereas, the acquisition in the present case was for 6.43 acres and thus, an appropriate deduction was required to be applied. 11. In the humble opinion of this Court in the given facts and circumstances , it may not be necessary to apply deduction towards smallness of area involved in the sale instance Ex.P-2 dated 12.06.1979 especially, when the respondents-landowners were not awarded any appreciation by the learned Reference Court over the sale price per acre derived from the sale instance Ex.P-2 for the time gap between the said sale transaction dated 12.06.1979 up to the date of notification issued under Section 4 of the Act in the case in hand which was published on 09.12.1980. 12. 12. In such circumstances, the equities been balanced by the learned Reference Court, no interference is called for with the impugned award dated 19.03.2001, the same being based on proper appreciation of the evidence and the material available on record. TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.02.27 16:12 I agree to specified portions of this document 4 RFA-2286-2001 (O&M) and other connected cases 13. In the given facts, since the land was acquired for public purpose namely for construction of road from Bhondsi to Behlpa, the State did not suffer any loss of land or expense towards providing of additional infrastructural amenities like parks, roads, green belts or community building etc, thus, no cut towards development cost needs to be applied. 14. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the present appeals are thus, dismissed. 20.02.2026 (HARKESH MANUJA) Tejwinder JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Other Connected cases RFA-3930-2001 RFA-3931-2001 RFA-4197-2001 TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.02.27 16:12 I agree to specified portions of this document