RFA-3614 and other connected cases 111 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Punjab Mandi Board Tilak Raj and others CORAM: Present: HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) Appeals footnote of this judgment, are being decided as all the appeals have arisen out of common acquisition/Award involving identical facts and question of law. For the sake of brevity, facts are being taken from RFA No.3614 o 2. the Award dated Kapurthala whereby, the reference petition filed 3614-2009 (O&M), XOBJR-6 of 2025 and other connected cases [1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** RFA XOBJR Date of Decision: Punjab Mandi Board, Chandigarh Versus Tilak Raj and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. Hitesh Pandit, Advocate for the appellant-Mandi Board. Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sandeep Chopra, Advocate, Mr. Viney Puri, Advocate Mr. Naresh Prabhakar, Advocate for the landowners. -.- HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) Vide this common order, a and 03 cross objections, 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 identical facts and question of law. For the sake of brevity, facts are being taken from RFA No.3614 of 2009 and XOBJR-6 of 2025 By way of present appeal(s), challenge has been laid to the Award dated 16.10.2008 passed by the learned Kapurthala (hereinafter to be referred as the ‘ whereby, the reference petition filed 6 of 2025 1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA-3614-2009 (O&M) and XOBJR-6 of 2025 Date of Decision: 09.04.2026 …….Appellant Versus ..….Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Hitesh Pandit, Advocate Mandi Board. Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sandeep Chopra, Advocate, Mr. Naresh Prabhakar, Advocate Vide this common order, a bunch of 22 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 identical facts and question of law. For the sake of brevity, facts are being taken from 6 of 2025. By way of present appeal(s), challenge has been laid to passed by the learned District Judge, (hereinafter to be referred as the ‘Reference Court under Section 18 of the Land 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 identical facts and question of law. For the sake of brevity, facts are being taken from By way of present appeal(s), challenge has been laid to District Judge, Reference Court’) under Section 18 of the Land SANJAY GUPTA 2026.04.20 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-3614 and other connected cases Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the landowners, seeking enhancement of compensation was partly allowed. 3. acres 2 Kanals Dera Saidan and Randhirpur, 29.11.2000 Act, respectively New Grain Market Committee at Sultanpur Lodhi Section 11 of the 1894 Act was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘ the market value of the acquired granting all other statutory benefits under the 1894 Act: Sr. No. 1. 2. 4. respondents 1894 Act, which 3614-2009 (O&M), XOBJR-6 of 2025 and other connected cases [2 Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the landowners, seeking enhancement of compensation was partly Briefly stating, in the present case(s), land measuring acres 2 Kanals 3 marlas situated within the revenue estate of Dera Saidan and Randhirpur, was acquired vide Notifications dated 29.11.2000 and 18.04.2001 issued under Sections 4 & 6 of the 1894 respectively, for the public purpose, namely, “ New Grain Market Committee at Sultanpur Lodhi Section 11 of the 1894 Act was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘the LAC’) on 14.08.2001 the market value of the acquired land granting all other statutory benefits under the 1894 Act: Sr. No. Village Type of land Village Dera Saidan Land upto 7 karams from Kapurthala-Sultanpur Lodhi Land falling upto 7 karams on Sultanpur Lodhi Rest of the land Village Randhirpur For all kinds of Dissatisfied with the Award passed by the LAC, respondents-landowners invoked Reference under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, which were partly allowed by the learned Reference Court 6 of 2025 2] Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘1894 Act’) by the landowners, seeking enhancement of compensation was partly Briefly stating, in the present case(s), land measuring situated within the revenue estate of Villages was acquired vide Notifications dated issued under Sections 4 & 6 of the 1894 for the public purpose, namely, “for construction New Grain Market Committee at Sultanpur Lodhi”. Award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act was passed by the Land Acquisition 14.08.2001, thereby determining land in the following manner besides granting all other statutory benefits under the 1894 Act:- Type of land Market Value (Rs. Per acre) Land upto 7 karams from Sultanpur Lodhi Rs.6,00,000/- Land falling upto 7 karams on Lodhi Lohian Road Rs.6,50,000/- Rest of the land Rs.5,00,000/- kinds of land. Rs.5,00,000/- Dissatisfied with the Award passed by the LAC, landowners invoked Reference under Section 18 of the partly allowed by the learned Reference Court ’) by the landowners, seeking enhancement of compensation was partly Briefly stating, in the present case(s), land measuring 49 Villages was acquired vide Notifications dated issued under Sections 4 & 6 of the 1894 construction of ”. Award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act was passed by the Land Acquisition , thereby determining esides Market Value Per - - - - Dissatisfied with the Award passed by the LAC, landowners invoked Reference under Section 18 of the partly allowed by the learned Reference Court SANJAY GUPTA 2026.04.20 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-3614 and other connected cases vide its decision dated compensation @ Rs statutory benefits/interest in their favour under the 1894 Act with solatium @ 30% and interest on the enhanced amount @ 9% per annum for the first year from the date of taking possession and @ 15% per 5 appeals as well as the respondents appeals/cross footnote of this judgment. CONTENTION(S): ON BEHALF OF 6. submits that the Award passed by the learned Reference Court was wholly non the learned Reference Court erred not considering the produced by the State in the form of Ex.R2 to Ex.R6 while re assessing the market value. He thus prays that the impugned award was liable to be set aside of the Punjab Mandi Board were to be allowed. ON BEHALF OF THE 7. of the respondents 3614-2009 (O&M), XOBJR-6 of 2025 and other connected cases [3 vide its decision dated 16.10.2008 compensation @ Rs.8,80,000/- per acre statutory benefits/interest in their favour under the 1894 Act with solatium @ 30% and interest on the enhanced amount @ 9% per annum for the first year from the date of taking possession and @ 15% per annum for the subsequent period till realization. Aggrieved thereof, the appellant appeals as well as the respondents appeals/cross-objections, details whereof are mentioned in the footnote of this judgment. CONTENTION(S): ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT - PUNJAB MANDI BOARD Impugning the aforementioned award, learned counsel submits that the Award passed by the learned Reference Court was wholly non-speaking and devoid of reasons. He further contends that earned Reference Court erred not considering the produced by the State in the form of Ex.R2 to Ex.R6 while re assessing the market value. He thus prays that the impugned award was liable to be set aside and the appeal(s) preferred at the ins of the Punjab Mandi Board were to be allowed. ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS Per contra, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf respondents-landowners submits that the learned Reference 6 of 2025 3] 16.10.2008, while granting enhanced per acre besides awarding all other statutory benefits/interest in their favour under the 1894 Act along with solatium @ 30% and interest on the enhanced amount @ 9% per annum for the first year from the date of taking possession and @ annum for the subsequent period till realization. the appellant-Mandi Board filed the appeals as well as the respondents-landowners filed the objections, details whereof are mentioned in the PUNJAB MANDI BOARD:- Impugning the aforementioned award, learned counsel submits that the Award passed by the learned Reference Court was speaking and devoid of reasons. He further contends that earned Reference Court erred not considering the sale instances produced by the State in the form of Ex.R2 to Ex.R6 while re assessing the market value. He thus prays that the impugned award and the appeal(s) preferred at the instance of the Punjab Mandi Board were to be allowed. RESPONDENTS-LANDOWNERS: - Per contra, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf landowners submits that the learned Reference , while granting enhanced besides awarding all other along with solatium @ 30% and interest on the enhanced amount @ 9% per annum for the first year from the date of taking possession and @ Mandi Board filed the landowners filed the objections, details whereof are mentioned in the Impugning the aforementioned award, learned counsel submits that the Award passed by the learned Reference Court was speaking and devoid of reasons. He further contends that sale instances produced by the State in the form of Ex.R2 to Ex.R6 while re- assessing the market value. He thus prays that the impugned award tance Per contra, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf landowners submits that the learned Reference SANJAY GUPTA 2026.04.20 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-3614 and other connected cases Court erred sale instances produced by the landowners. landowners produced instance was required to be taken into could have been applied towards smallness of area involved therein. Learned Senior counsel record, the market value was required to be re appeal(s) prefe whereas dismissed. DISCUSSION AND REASONING: 8. through the paper 9. instances produced by the appellant to substantiate their effective claims hereunder: Sale deeds produced by the Sr. No. Sale Exhibits 1. Ex.R2 2. Ex.R3 3. Ex.R4 3614-2009 (O&M), XOBJR-6 of 2025 and other connected cases [4 Court erred in failing to record any reasons for not considering the sale instances produced by the landowners. landowners produced six sale instances out of which dated 22.06.1999 (Ex. P5) was required to be taken into account and at best, suitable deduction could have been applied towards smallness of area involved therein. Learned Senior counsel thus, prays that on the basis of evidence on record, the market value was required to be re appeal(s) preferred at the instance of landowners were to be allowed the appeal(s) preferred by dismissed. DISCUSSION AND REASONING: - I have head learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book as well as records of the Firstly, it would be relevant to take note of the sale instances produced by the appellant(s to substantiate their effective claims. T hereunder:- Sale deeds produced by the Mandi Exhibits Date of sale deed Area (Kanals- Marlas) Village 2 28.03.2000 2K – 13M Dera Saidan 3 24.04.2000 8K – 13M Dera Saidan 4 06.09.2000 2K – 13M Dera Saidan 6 of 2025 4] reasons for not considering the sale instances produced by the landowners. He points out that the sale instances out of which, the sale fetching the highest sale price account and at best, suitable deduction could have been applied towards smallness of area involved therein. thus, prays that on the basis of evidence on record, the market value was required to be re-assessed and the rred at the instance of landowners were to be allowed the appeal(s) preferred by Mandi Board were to be I have head learned counsel for the parties and gone book as well as records of the case. Firstly, it would be relevant to take note of the sale s) and the respondents in order . The details thereof are extracted Mandi Board:- Total Sale consideratio n (Rs.) Value per acre (Rs.) Dera Saidan 2,19,000/- 10,00,000/- Dera Saidan 2,70,500/- 2,00,000/- Dera Saidan 2,19,000/- 6,61,132/- reasons for not considering the He points out that the the sale fetching the highest sale price account and at best, suitable deduction could have been applied towards smallness of area involved therein. thus, prays that on the basis of evidence on the rred at the instance of landowners were to be allowed were to be I have head learned counsel for the parties and gone Firstly, it would be relevant to take note of the sale and the respondents in order he details thereof are extracted SANJAY GUPTA 2026.04.20 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-3614 and other connected cases 4. Ex.R5 5. Ex.R6 Sale deeds produced by the landowners: Sr. No. Sale Exhibit s 1. Ex.P5 2. Ex.P 3. Ex.P 4. Ex.P 5. Ex.P 6. Ex.P 10. Court passed the following order: 10.1. officials from the Consolidation Department, Government of Punjab, was taken on record as Mark ‘X’ and the order reads as under: 3614-2009 (O&M), XOBJR-6 of 2025 and other connected cases [5 5 30.08.2000 6K – 14M Dera Saidan 6 24.04.2000 3K – 5M Dera Saidan Sale deeds produced by the landowners: Sale Exhibit Date of sale deed Area (Kanals- Marlas) Village Ex.P5 22.06.1999 1K – 0M Dera Saidan Ex.P6 02.07.1999 0K – 10M Dera Saidan Ex.P8 02.07.1999 0K – 10M Dera Saidan Ex.P10 24.04.1995 1K – 10M Dera Saidan Ex.P12 06.10.2000 0K – 10M Dera Saidan Ex.P14 07.04.1998 0K – 15M Dera Saidan Further, it may be noticed here that on 21.01.2026, this Court passed the following order:- “Both the sides have relied upon different sale leads, however, the location of the land parcels therein in comparison to the acquired land has not been proved on record by any way of any plan. In such circumstances, learned to direct the concerned official of the Coloni Govt. of Punjab to produce a copy of instances produced by the respective parties and also th acquired land as the same would help this and fair conclusion with respect to the determination of market value. List on 13.02.2026. Photocopy of this order be placed on file case(s).” Thereafter on 20.03.2026, the site plan prepared by the officials from the Consolidation Department, Government of Punjab, was taken on record as Mark ‘X’ and the order reads as under: 6 of 2025 5] Dera Saidan 2,52,000/- 3,00,000/- Dera Saidan 1,50,000/- 5,00,000/- Sale deeds produced by the landowners:- Total Sale consideration (Rs.) Value per acre Dera Saidan 10,00,000/- 80,00,000/- Dera Saidan 4,90,000/- 78,40,000/- Dera Saidan 4,90,000/- 78,40,000/- Dera Saidan 1,00,000/- 5,33,000/- Dera Saidan 4,90,000/- 78,40,000/- Dera Saidan 1,50,000/- 16,00,000/- noticed here that on 21.01.2026, this “Both the sides have relied upon different sale leads, however, the location of the land parcels therein in comparison to the acquired land has not been proved on record by any way of In such circumstances, learned State Counsel is requested to direct the concerned official of the Colonisation Department, of Punjab to produce a copy of akshajra depicting the sale instances produced by the respective parties and also th d land as the same would help this Court to arrive at a just and fair conclusion with respect to the determination of market Photocopy of this order be placed on file(s) of connected 20.03.2026, the site plan prepared by the officials from the Consolidation Department, Government of Punjab, was taken on record as Mark ‘X’ and the order reads as under:- noticed here that on 21.01.2026, this “Both the sides have relied upon different sale leads, however, the location of the land parcels therein in comparison to the acquired land has not been proved on record by any way of is requested ation Department, ra depicting the sale instances produced by the respective parties and also the ourt to arrive at a just and fair conclusion with respect to the determination of market of connected 20.03.2026, the site plan prepared by the officials from the Consolidation Department, Government of Punjab, SANJAY GUPTA 2026.04.20 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-3614 and other connected cases 10.2. material available on record, it is evident that the Villages Dera Saidan and Randhirpur continuous stretch of land compact block sale instances pertaining to be safely relied upon for assessment of market value in case(s) in hand. Further, forming part abutting and adjoining the acquired land Sultanpur Lodhi 10.3. instance produced by Mandi Board as opposite side of the acquired land. The land parcels of the sale instance produced in the form of Exs.R considerable 3614-2009 (O&M), XOBJR-6 of 2025 and other connected cases [6 “In terms of previous order dated 21.01.2026, learned State counsel has produced on record site plan for the assistance of the Court depicting the land parcels forming part of sale instances produced by the respective parties vis acquired land and the same having been duly signed by the learned counsel for the parties is taken on record as Mark List on 09.04.2026. To be shown in the urgent list. A photocopy of this order be placed on connected case files.” From the perusal of the sit material available on record, it is evident that the Villages Dera Saidan and Randhirpur continuous stretch of land; with the acquired land comprising a single compact block intended for construction of New Grain Market. Thus, sale instances pertaining to the revenue estate of Dera Saidan can be safely relied upon for assessment of market value in case(s) in hand. Further, the site plan Mark ‘X’ also reflects that land parcels forming part of six sale instances produced by the landowners are abutting and adjoining the acquired land Sultanpur Lodhi-Kapurthala road. On the other hand, the land parcel forming part of the sale instance produced by Mandi Board as opposite side of the acquired land. The land parcels of the sale instance produced in the form of Exs.R considerable distance from the acquired land. 6 of 2025 6] “In terms of previous order dated 21.01.2026, learned State counsel has produced on record site plan for the assistance of the Court depicting the land parcels forming part of sale instances produced by the respective parties vis-à-vis the d the same having been duly signed by the learned counsel for the parties is taken on record as Mark-X. To be shown in the urgent list. A photocopy of this order be placed on connected case perusal of the site plan Mark ‘X’ and the material available on record, it is evident that the revenue estates of Villages Dera Saidan and Randhirpur are adjoining and form a with the acquired land comprising a single construction of New Grain Market. Thus, revenue estate of Dera Saidan can be safely relied upon for assessment of market value in case(s) in the site plan Mark ‘X’ also reflects that land parcels of six sale instances produced by the landowners are abutting and adjoining the acquired land which further abuts On the other hand, the land parcel forming part of the sale instance produced by Mandi Board as Ex.R2 is located on the opposite side of the acquired land. The land parcels of the sale instance produced in the form of Exs.R3 and R4 are again distance from the acquired land. The site plan Mark ‘X’ “In terms of previous order dated 21.01.2026, learned State counsel has produced on record site plan for the assistance of the Court depicting the land parcels forming part of vis the d the same having been duly signed by the A photocopy of this order be placed on connected case e plan Mark ‘X’ and the revenue estates of are adjoining and form a with the acquired land comprising a single construction of New Grain Market. Thus, revenue estate of Dera Saidan can be safely relied upon for assessment of market value in case(s) in the site plan Mark ‘X’ also reflects that land parcels of six sale instances produced by the landowners are further abuts On the other hand, the land parcel forming part of the sale Ex.R2 is located on the opposite side of the acquired land. The land parcels of the sale again at The site plan Mark ‘X’ SANJAY GUPTA 2026.04.20 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-3614 and other connected cases does not depict the comparative locati part of the sale instances Ex.R5 and R6 Thus, in the produced by the landowners which pertained to the land parcel identically and geographically fact just abutting and adjoining the same, needs to be relied upon for the purpose of determination of market value in the case(s) in hand being of same nature, location and potential. 11. landowners further close proximity to the acquired land deed Ex.P10), sale price per acre was Rs.5.33 lakhs which in April 1998 (as per sale deed Ex.P1 thereafter in the year 1999 acre and further, to Rs.80 lakhs per acre (as per sale instances Exs.P5, P6, P8 and P12). was led by the appellant produced by the that the sale consideration reflected therein was inflated any undue benefit for the purpose of claiming higher compe 11.1. sale instance dated of Village Dera Saidan 3614-2009 (O&M), XOBJR-6 of 2025 and other connected cases [7 does not depict the comparative locati part of the sale instances Ex.R5 and R6 Thus, in the given facts and circumstances, the sale instances produced by the landowners which pertained to the land parcel identically and geographically situated fact just abutting and adjoining the same, needs to be relied upon for the purpose of determination of market value in the case(s) in hand being of same nature, location and potential. A perusal of the sale ins landowners further indicates a gradual increase in close proximity to the acquired land. In the year 1995 (as per sale deed Ex.P10), sale price per acre was Rs.5.33 lakhs which in April 1998 (as per sale deed Ex.P14) went up to Rs.16 lakhs per acre and thereafter in the year 1999-2000, it reached upto Rs.78 lakhs per acre and further, to Rs.80 lakhs per acre (as per sale instances Exs.P5, P6, P8 and P12). It may also be noted here that n led by the appellant(s) to establish that the sale instances produced by the landowners were not that the sale consideration reflected therein was inflated any undue benefit for the purpose of claiming higher compe Therefore, out of the aforementioned six sale deeds, the sale instance dated 22.06.1999 (Ex.P5) relating to the revenue estate of Village Dera Saidan vide which 1 kanal of land was sold for Rs.10 6 of 2025 7] does not depict the comparative location of the land parcels forming part of the sale instances Ex.R5 and R6 vis-à-vis the acquired land. given facts and circumstances, the sale instances produced by the landowners which pertained to the land parcel situated viz-a-viz the acquired land; in fact just abutting and adjoining the same, needs to be relied upon for the purpose of determination of market value in the case(s) in hand being of same nature, location and potential. A perusal of the sale instances produced by the indicates a gradual increase in land prices in the . In the year 1995 (as per sale deed Ex.P10), sale price per acre was Rs.5.33 lakhs which in April 4) went up to Rs.16 lakhs per acre and 2000, it reached upto Rs.78 lakhs per acre and further, to Rs.80 lakhs per acre (as per sale instances It may also be noted here that no evidence to establish that the sale instances were not bona fide sale transactions or that the sale consideration reflected therein was inflated to secure any undue benefit for the purpose of claiming higher compensation. ut of the aforementioned six sale deeds, the 22.06.1999 (Ex.P5) relating to the revenue estate 1 kanal of land was sold for Rs.10 on of the land parcels forming the acquired land. given facts and circumstances, the sale instances produced by the landowners which pertained to the land parcel the acquired land; in fact just abutting and adjoining the same, needs to be relied upon for the purpose of determination of market value in the case(s) in hand tances produced by the prices in the . In the year 1995 (as per sale deed Ex.P10), sale price per acre was Rs.5.33 lakhs which in April 4) went up to Rs.16 lakhs per acre and 2000, it reached upto Rs.78 lakhs per acre and further, to Rs.80 lakhs per acre (as per sale instances o evidence to establish that the sale instances sale transactions or secure nsation. ut of the aforementioned six sale deeds, the 22.06.1999 (Ex.P5) relating to the revenue estate 1 kanal of land was sold for Rs.10 SANJAY GUPTA 2026.04.20 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-3614 and other connected cases lakhs with the base price of Rs.80,00,000/ highest sale price needs to be relied upon for assessing the market value, especially, in the wake of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of the case of as ‘2024(4) R.C.R. (Civil) exemplar was to considered while assessing the market value in the cases of compulsory land acquisition. Relevant paragraph Nos.27 and 28 from 3614-2009 (O&M), XOBJR-6 of 2025 and other connected cases [8 lakhs with the base price of Rs.80,00,000/ highest sale price needs to be relied upon for assessing the market value, especially, in the wake of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of the case of Horrmal Vs. State of Haryana, ‘2024(4) R.C.R. (Civil) 758’, as per which the highest valued sale exemplar was to considered while assessing the market value in the cases of compulsory land acquisition. Relevant paragraph Nos.27 and 28 from Horrmal’s case (supra) are extracted hereunder: “28. This view has been reiterated of M.P., (2013) 16 SCC 392 this Court consolidated various circumstances where there are multiple sale deeds available for consideration, the Court shall rely on the highest valued exemplars unless the prices fall within a narrow range, in which case calculating an average of the values therein may be more congruous. 29. In these extenuating circumstances, there exists significant disparity among the sale exemplars presently under consideration. Amongst these sale exemplars, being Ex. P2-P8 and Ex. P10, the highest sale instance values land at Rupees 1,81,33,867 per acre, whereas the lowest values it at Rupees 16,94,000 per acre. Given this wide range and in light of the judicial precedents cited above, we are of the opinion that we should rely upon the highest sale exemplar, which is Ex. P5, rather than solely depending upon an average of the multiple sale deeds produced before us. Despite the Respondents’ vehement contention that Ex. P5 should not be relied upon owing to it being a significantly smaller parcel of land conducted above indicates no reason why Ex. P5 cannot be utilised to determine the amount of compensation to be 6 of 2025 8] lakhs with the base price of Rs.80,00,000/- per acre, fetching the highest sale price needs to be relied upon for assessing the market value, especially, in the wake of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Horrmal Vs. State of Haryana, reported as per which the highest valued sale exemplar was to considered while assessing the market value in the cases of compulsory land acquisition. Relevant paragraph Nos.27 case (supra) are extracted hereunder:- This view has been reiterated in Sh. Himmat Singh v. State (2013) 16 SCC 392 where a three-judge bench of this Court consolidated various precedents to affirm that in circumstances where there are multiple sale deeds available for consideration, the Court shall rely on the highest valued exemplars unless the prices fall within a narrow range, in which case calculating an average of the es therein may be more congruous. In these extenuating circumstances, there exists significant disparity among the sale exemplars presently under consideration. Amongst these sale exemplars, being Ex. P8 and Ex. P10, the highest sale instance values the land at Rupees 1,81,33,867 per acre, whereas the lowest values it at Rupees 16,94,000 per acre. Given this wide range and in light of the judicial precedents cited above, we are of the opinion that we should rely upon the highest sale is Ex. P5, rather than solely depending upon an average of the multiple sale deeds produced before us. Despite the Respondents’ vehement contention that Ex. P5 should not be relied upon owing to it being a significantly smaller parcel of land— the detailed analysis conducted above indicates no reason why Ex. P5 cannot be utilised to determine the amount of compensation to be fetching the highest sale price needs to be relied upon for assessing the market value, especially, in the wake of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex reported as per which the highest valued sale exemplar was to considered while assessing the market value in the cases of compulsory land acquisition. Relevant paragraph Nos.27 Sh. Himmat Singh v. State judge bench of precedents to affirm that in circumstances where there are multiple sale deeds available for consideration, the Court shall rely on the highest valued exemplars unless the prices fall within a narrow range, in which case calculating an average of the In these extenuating circumstances, there exists significant disparity among the sale exemplars presently under consideration. Amongst these sale exemplars, being Ex. the land at Rupees 1,81,33,867 per acre, whereas the lowest values it at Rupees 16,94,000 per acre. Given this wide range and in light of the judicial precedents cited above, we are of the opinion that we should rely upon the highest sale is Ex. P5, rather than solely depending upon an average of the multiple sale deeds produced before us. Despite the Respondents’ vehement contention that Ex. P5 should not be relied upon owing to it being a analysis conducted above indicates no reason why Ex. P5 cannot be utilised to determine the amount of compensation to be SANJAY GUPTA 2026.04.20 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-3614 and other connected cases 12. dated 22.06.1999 commenced vide notification dated around 1 date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act in the case(s) in hand, suitable appreciation needs to be awarded in favour of the landowners in view of the geographical location of the acquired land which to Kapurthala and also the gradual increase in price area. 12.1. learned Reference Court based on the material evidence on record with respect to the locational and potential advantage attached to the land under acquisition in its award hereunder: 3614-2009 (O&M), XOBJR-6 of 2025 and other connected cases [9 awarded to the Appellants for the acquired land.” Taking into account the fact that the sale deed (Ex.P 22.06.1999, whereas the acquisition in the present case(s) commenced vide notification dated 29.11.2000 around 17 months, between the date of sale deed (Ex.P date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act in the (s) in hand, suitable appreciation needs to be awarded in favour of the landowners in view of the geographical location of the acquired which is located on the main road leading from Sultanpur to Kapurthala and also the gradual increase in price Further, positive findings learned Reference Court based on the material evidence on record with respect to the locational and potential advantage attached to the land under acquisition in its award hereunder:- “The fact that it is undisputedly established on the record that the acquired land is on the town adjoining the being used for agricultural purposes as well as small time commercial establishments which of the town and as is normally seen that with expansion of the town such like structures and establishments dots area gives some leverage to the fact that along with the agricultural potential which the acquir was also being put forth for such trading and commercial activities. To the query of this 6 of 2025 9] awarded to the Appellants for the acquired land.” Taking into account the fact that the sale deed (Ex.P-5 , whereas the acquisition in the present case(s) 29.11.2000; for the time gap of months, between the date of sale deed (Ex.P-5) and the date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act in the (s) in hand, suitable appreciation needs to be awarded in favour of the landowners in view of the geographical location of the acquired is located on the main road leading from Sultanpur Lodhi to Kapurthala and also the gradual increase in price of land in the of fact were recorded by the learned Reference Court based on the material evidence on record with respect to the locational and potential advantage attached to the land under acquisition in its award and the same is extracted The fact that it is undisputedly established on the record that the acquired land is on the town adjoining the State Highway being used for agricultural purposes as well as small time commercial establishments which were coming up in the periphery of the town and as is normally seen that with expansion of the town such like structures and establishments dots, the periphery area gives some leverage to the fact that along with the agricultural potential which the acquire land was possessed off, it was also being put forth for such trading and commercial To the query of this Court that the unrebutted evidence 5) is , whereas the acquisition in the present case(s) ; for the time gap of ) and the date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act in the (s) in hand, suitable appreciation needs to be awarded in favour of the landowners in view of the geographical location of the acquired Lodhi of land in the recorded by the learned Reference Court based on the material evidence on record with respect to the locational and potential advantage attached to the is extracted The fact that it is undisputedly established on the record ighway being used for agricultural purposes as well as small time were coming up in the periphery of the town and as is normally seen that with expansion of the the periphery area gives some leverage to the fact that along with the f, it was also being put forth for such trading and commercial that the unrebutted evidence SANJAY GUPTA 2026.04.20 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-3614 and other connected cases either of the learned counsel representing the appellant controvert the said finding, in such circumstances, since it is evident that the acquired land had attached to it, be granted over the base price of from sale instance Rs.91,33,360 13. the sale deed dated 22.06.1999 land in the present case(s) measures whereas the sale instance Ex. P same possessed geographical temporal proximity notification dated land parcel forming part of the sale instance Ex.P would be appropriate to apply 3614-2009 (O&M), XOBJR-6 of 2025 and other connected cases [10 and which has come in the oral statement of the witness of the respondents that the acquired Sultanpur Lodhi settlement and the Rail Coach Factory being 7 K.Ms away from the acquired very uses, to which the land was being put to issuance of notification under Section 4 No evidence to the contrary having been pointed out by either of the learned counsel representing the appellant controvert the said finding, in such circumstances, since it is evident that the acquired land had high locational and po attached to it, therefore, an appreciation @ 1 be granted over the base price of Rs.80,00,000/ from sale instance dated 22.06.1999 91,33,360/- per acre. Insofar as the smallness of the land parcel forming part of sale deed dated 22.06.1999 (Ex.P land in the present case(s) measures whereas the sale instance Ex. P-5 pertains to possessed locational similarity geographical proximity to the acquired land, besides also having temporal proximity, the acquisition notification dated 29.11.2000; this Court is mindful of the fact that land parcel forming part of the sale instance Ex.P would be appropriate to apply a deduction 6 of 2025 10] and which has come in the oral statement of the witness of the acquired land is 1 K.M. away from the ettlement and the Rail Coach Factory being 6 d land, further gives in eight into the to which the land was being put to, at the time of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act.” No evidence to the contrary having been pointed out by either of the learned counsel representing the appellant(s) controvert the said finding, in such circumstances, since it is evident locational and potential value an appreciation @ 10% per annum needs to Rs.80,00,000/ per acre derived dated 22.06.1999 (Ex.P-5) which comes to Insofar as the smallness of the land parcel forming part of (Ex.P5) is concerned, the acquired land in the present case(s) measures 49 acres 2 kanals 8 marlas pertains to 1 Kanal. Though the locational similarity and was situated in close proximity to the acquired land, besides also having the acquisition having commenced vide this Court is mindful of the fact that the land parcel forming part of the sale instance Ex.P-5 is small, thus, a deduction of 60% over the base price and which has come in the oral statement of the witness of the away from the to into the at the time of No evidence to the contrary having been pointed out by to controvert the said finding, in such circumstances, since it is evident tential value % per annum needs to per acre derived ) which comes to Insofar as the smallness of the land parcel forming part of ) is concerned, the acquired 49 acres 2 kanals 8 marlas the and was situated in close proximity to the acquired land, besides also having commenced vide the 5 is small, thus, it 0% over the base price SANJAY GUPTA 2026.04.20 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-3614 and other connected cases per acre derived from the sale instance dated towards smallness of area involved therein. 14. purpose, namely, Sultanpur Lodhi optimum utilization of land nor did it incur any expense towar providing of additional infrastructural amenities like parks, roads, green belts or community building etc., thus, no cut towards development cost needs to be applied. 15. forms part of two rev Randhirpur, entire chunk of is a compact block and is located on the main road leading from Sultanpur Lodhi to Kapurthala, as such, uniform market value need 16. market value with respect to the acquired land as on the date of notification under section 4 of the Act, after applying 10% per annu Rs.36,53,344/ Calculation: Sale deed dated 22.06.1999 (Ex.P5) Appreciation @ 10% for 17 months 3614-2009 (O&M), XOBJR-6 of 2025 and other connected cases [11 per acre derived from the sale instance dated towards smallness of area involved therein. In the given facts, since the land was acquired for public purpose, namely, “for construction of New Grain Market Committee at Sultanpur Lodhi”, the State neither suffered any loss towards optimum utilization of land nor did it incur any expense towar providing of additional infrastructural amenities like parks, roads, green belts or community building etc., thus, no cut towards development cost needs to be applied. Furthermore, it was not disputed that the acquired land forms part of two revenue estates of Villages Dera Saidan and Randhirpur, yet both abut and adjoin each other as a one unit and the entire chunk of is a compact block and is located on the main road leading from Sultanpur Lodhi to Kapurthala, as such, uniform market value needs to be awarded in favour of the landowners. In view of the detailed discussions made herein market value with respect to the acquired land as on the date of notification under section 4 of the Act, after applying 10% per annum and subsequently, 36,53,344/- per acre as per the calculation below: Calculation:- Sale deed dated 22.06.1999 (Ex.P5) Base Price = Rs. 80,00,000/ Appreciation @ 10% for 17 months 80,00,000 6 of 2025 11] per acre derived from the sale instance dated 22.06.1999 (Ex.P towards smallness of area involved therein. In the given facts, since the land was acquired for public for construction of New Grain Market Committee at , the State neither suffered any loss towards optimum utilization of land nor did it incur any expense towar providing of additional infrastructural amenities like parks, roads, green belts or community building etc., thus, no cut towards development cost needs to be applied. Furthermore, it was not disputed that the acquired land enue estates of Villages Dera Saidan and and adjoin each other as a one unit and the entire chunk of is a compact block and is located on the main road leading from Sultanpur Lodhi to Kapurthala, as such, uniform market s to be awarded in favour of the landowners. In view of the detailed discussions made herein-above the market value with respect to the acquired land as on the date of notification under section 4 of the Act, after applying appreciation @ m and subsequently, deduction of 60%, comes to per the calculation below:- Base Price = Rs. 80,00,000/- per acre 80,00,000 + 11,33,360 (Ex.P5) In the given facts, since the land was acquired for public for construction of New Grain Market Committee at , the State neither suffered any loss towards optimum utilization of land nor did it incur any expense towards providing of additional infrastructural amenities like parks, roads, green belts or community building etc., thus, no cut towards Furthermore, it was not disputed that the acquired land enue estates of Villages Dera Saidan and and adjoin each other as a one unit and the entire chunk of is a compact block and is located on the main road leading from Sultanpur Lodhi to Kapurthala, as such, uniform market above the market value with respect to the acquired land as on the date of appreciation @ 0%, comes to SANJAY GUPTA 2026.04.20 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-3614 and other connected cases Deduction of 60% Net Value 17. acquisition are held entitled Rs. 36,53,344 entitled for all the statutory benefits and interest especially the interest on solatium. 18. preferred at the instance of dismissed, and the appeal instance of landowners are disposed of with the aforesaid modification. 19. expired in the appeal(s)/cross legal heirs have not been impleaded, they shall be at liberty to seek execution of the present decision by moving appropriate applicat before the learned Executing Court. 20. of. 09.04.2026 sanjay 3614-2009 (O&M), XOBJR-6 of 2025 and other connected cases [12 (Base =91,33,360/ Deduction of 60% 91,33,360 (Price = 36,53,344 Net Value Rs. Accordingly, the landowners relating to the present acquisition are held entitled to market value ,53,344/- per acre. Besides it, the landowners shall also be entitled for all the statutory benefits and interest especially the interest on solatium. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the appeal preferred at the instance of Punjab Mandi Board dismissed, and the appeal(s)/cross objection(s) instance of landowners are disposed of with the aforesaid modification. 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 applicat before the learned Executing Court. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed .04.2026 Whether speaking/reasoned? Whether Reportable? 6 of 2025 12] (Base Price + Interest) 91,33,360/- 91,33,360 - 54,80,016 (Price – 60% of Price) 36,53,344 Rs. 36,53,344/- the landowners relating to the present market value at the uniform rate of Besides it, the landowners shall also be entitled for all the statutory benefits and interest under the 1894 Act In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the appeal Punjab Mandi Board are hereby, )/cross objection(s) preferred at the instance of landowners are disposed of with the aforesaid Wherever the landowner(s) has/have unfortunately 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 Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Yes/No the landowners relating to the present rate of Besides it, the landowners shall also be under the 1894 Act, In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the appeal(s) are hereby, preferred at the instance of landowners are disposed of with the aforesaid Wherever the landowner(s) has/have unfortunately objection(s) after filing thereof and the legal heirs have not been impleaded, they shall be at liberty to seek ions Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed (HARKESH MANUJA) SANJAY GUPTA 2026.04.20 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-3614 and other connected cases 09.04.2026 sanjay 3614-2009 (O&M), XOBJR-6 of 2025 and other connected cases [13 Sr.No. Case No. 1. RFA-3600 2. RFA-3601 3. RFA-3602 4. RFA-3603 5. RFA-3604 6. RFA-3605 7. RFA-3606 8. RFA-3607 9. RFA-3608 10. RFA-3609 11. RFA-3610 12. RFA-3611 13. RFA-3612 14. RFA-3613 15. RFA-3615 16. RFA-1945 17. RFA-2922 18. RFA-2929 19. RFA-2834 20. RFA-3599 21. XOBJR-42 22. RFA-2928 23. XOBJR-13 .2026 6 of 2025 13] Case No. 3600-2009 (O&M) 3601-2009 (O&M) 3602-2009 (O&M) 3603-2009 (O&M) 3604-2009 (O&M) 3605-2009 (O&M) 3606-2009 (O&M) 3607-2009 (O&M) 3608-2009 (O&M) 3609-2009 (O&M) 3610-2009 (O&M) 3611-2009 (O&M) 3612-2009 (O&M) 3613-2009 (O&M) 3615-2009 (O&M) 1945-2009 (O&M) 2922-2009 (O&M) 2929-2009 (O&M) 2834-2009 (O&M) 3599-2009 (O&M) 42-CI-2013 2928-2009 (O&M) 13-CI-2010 (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE SANJAY GUPTA 2026.04.20 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document