1 129 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. CHHABILA AND ORS. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Sandeep Kotla, HARKESH MANUJA Vide this common order, a batch of 19 Regular First Appeals shall stand disposed of, details whereof are provided in the footnote of the judgment. For convenience, the facts are drawn from RFA 2003. By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgment dated Judge, Hisar, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Reference Court’) the reference petition filed under Section 18 of the Land 1894 (hereinafter referred to as landowner(s), seeking enhancement of compensation 2. Briefly stating, land measuring revenue estate of Village District Hisar, construction of Bhoj Raj Minor (publishsed on 21.01.19 6 respectively of the Act. passed Award No. the rate of Rs.1,25 Tal land and Rs.40,000/ statutory benefits. RFA-3515-2003 and other connected cases IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA-3515-2003 and other connected cases Date of Decision: STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. Versus AND ORS. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Sandeep Kotla, Advocate for the **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) Vide this common order, a batch of 19 Regular First Appeals shall stand disposed of, details whereof are provided in the footnote of the judgment. For convenience, the facts are drawn from RFA By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgment dated 22.05.2003 passed by the learned Additional District (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Reference Court’) the reference petition filed under Section 18 of the Land 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the , seeking enhancement of compensation Briefly stating, land measuring 2.26 acres revenue estate of Village Mangali Mohbat, District Hisar, was acquired for the public purpose construction of Bhoj Raj Minor vide notifications dated (publishsed on 21.01.1997) and 03.07.1999 6 respectively of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘LAC’) passed Award No.09H dated 22.03.1999 assessing the market value at 1,25,000/- per acre for Nehri land, and Rs.40,000/- per acre for Tibba statutory benefits. and other connected cases IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2003 and other connected cases Date of Decision: February 05, 2026 .....Appellants .....Respondents HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana. Advocate for the landowners. Vide this common order, a batch of 19 Regular First Appeals shall stand disposed of, details whereof are provided in the footnote of the judgment. For convenience, the facts are drawn from RFA-3515- By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the passed by the learned Additional District (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Reference Court’) whereby the reference petition filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, ‘the Act’) by the respondent(s)- , seeking enhancement of compensation was dismissed. 2.26 acres, situated within the Hadbast No.158, Tehsil and was acquired for the public purpose namely for vide notifications dated 20.01.1997 1999 issued under Sections 4 and The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘LAC’) assessing the market value at land, Rs.85,000/- per acre for Tibba land along with other 2003 and other connected cases February 05, 2026 Vide this common order, a batch of 19 Regular First Appeals shall stand disposed of, details whereof are provided in the footnote of - By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the passed by the learned Additional District whereby Acquisition Act, - , situated within the Hadbast No.158, Tehsil and for 20.01.1997 issued under Sections 4 and The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘LAC’) assessing the market value at per acre for r TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.02.13 18:58 I agree to specified portions of this document 2 RFA-3515-2003 and other connected cases 3. The respondent(s)-landowner(s), feeling dissatisfied with the award, sought reference under Section 18 of the Act pleading that the LAC wrongly categorized the land into different categories as the entire land was Nehri in nature. Moreover, it was pleaded that various factories such as GK Textile, Pipe Factory and furniture factory were located near the acquired land Thus, the said land had the potentiality of being used for industrial, residential and commercial purposes and in view thereof, the value of the acquired land was not less than Rs.5,00,000/- per acre . 4. Upon notice, the same was contested by the appellant(s)- State by filing written statement wherein the potentiality of the acquired land being used as commercial, industrial and residential purpose was denied. It was contended that the categorization of the acquired land as Nehri, Tal and Tibba was rightly done as per location at the site and therefore, no interference was warranted with the award of LAC on this account. 5. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by learned Reference Court:- “1. What was the market value of the acquired land on the date of the publication of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act? OPP 2. Relief.” 6. After considering the evidence, the learned Reference Court vide award dated 22.05.2003 did not enhance the amount of compensation but held respondent(s)-landowners entitled for 10% damages against severance of the awarded compensation. 7. Aggrieved of the aforesaid award dated 22.05.2003 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Hisar, the present appeal(s) have been filed by the appellant(s)-State as well as the respondents- landowners . 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book. I am unable to find substance in the submissions made on behalf of the appellant(s)-State. TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.02.13 18:58 I agree to specified portions of this document 3 RFA-3515-2003 and other connected cases 9. In the present case, though, the reference petition preferred at the instance of respondents-landowners was dismissed qua their claim of enhancement of compensation, however, the award passed by the learned Reference Court has been impugned by the appellant(s)-State as regards the nature of the acquired land and also with respect to 10% damages awarded in favour of respondents-landowners towards severance of their holdings. 10. A perusal of the record shows that based on the appreciation of material evidence available on record in the form of revenue entries, the learned Reference Court rightly recorded that the nature and quality of land as reflected in the revenue entries immediately preceding the acquisition proceedings ought to be taken into account. No illegality or perversity can be found with the aforesaid reasoning especially, when such revenue entries were never assailed by the appellant(s)-State and were in fact, recorded and maintained by the State-authority themselves. Furthermore, from perusal of material available on record in the form of site plan produced by both the parties as Ex.P-1, Ex.R-1 and Ex. R-2, it is apparent that the landholdings of the respondents have been bifurcated on account of acquisition of their land parcels for construction of Bhoj Raj Minor. 11. In the given facts and circumstances, respondents though have been awarded damages @10% of market value towards severance of their remaining landholdings, however, considering the fact the land in the present case(s) was acquired for the public purpose namely for construction of Bhoj Raj Minor which definitely and conclusively dissected the land into two parts, in such circumstances, the appellants/landowners were bound to suffer loss towards cultivation of land besides causing them inconvenience towards connectivity of the parcels left on either side of the Minor. Moreover, severance also causes reduction in value of remaining land due to alteration in access, useability, irregularity of shape and loss of agricultural viability etc., thus, it would be appropriate to award damages against severance of land in favour of the landowners @20% of the market value as assessed by this Court. TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.02.13 18:58 I agree to specified portions of this document 4 RFA-3515-2003 and other connected cases 12. Accordingly, the present appeals preferred at the instance of State are dismissed and the appeals preferred at the instance of landowners are allowed. 13. 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 applications before the learned Executing Court. 14. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 05.02.2026 (HARKESH MANUJA) Tejwinder JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Other connected cases RFA-3399-2003 RFA-3517-2003 RFA-3518-2003 RFA-3519-2003 RFA-3520-2003 RFA-3521-2003 RFA-3522-2003 RFA-3523-2003 RFA-3524-2003 RFA-3525-2003 RFA-3526-2003 RFA-3527-2003 RFA-3528-2003 RFA-3529-2003 RFA-3530-2003 RFA-3531-2003 RFA-3532-2003 RFA-3199-2003 TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.02.13 18:58 I agree to specified portions of this document