RFA-1480 129 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Satnarain and others State of Haryana and others CORAM: Present: HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) Appeals, details of which are given in the footnote of this judgment, are being decided as all the appeals have arisen out of common acquisition/Award involving identical facts and question of law. For the sake of brevity, facts a 2. the Award dated Judge, Jhajjar 3. 3.83 acres Shahjahanpur, H.B. No. 215, Tehsil and District Jhajjar, 480-2012 (O&M) and other connected cases IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** RFA Date of Decision: Satnarain and others Versus State of Haryana and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr.Chanderhas Yadav, Advocate Mr. Jitender Nara, Advocate and Mr. Davinder Kaliraman, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana. -.- HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) Vide this common order, a Appeals, details of which are given in the footnote of this judgment, are being decided as all the appeals have arisen out of common acquisition/Award involving 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 the Award dated 30.11.2010 passed by the learned Addl. District Jhajjar (hereinafter to be referred as the ‘ Briefly stating, in the present case(s), land measuring 3.83 acres situated within the revenue estate of Shahjahanpur, H.B. No. 215, Tehsil and District Jhajjar, 2 (O&M) and other connected cases [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA-1480-2012 (O&M) Date of Decision: 06.04.2026 …….Appellants Versus ..….Respondents JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Chanderhas Yadav, Advocate Mr. Jitender Nara, Advocate and Kaliraman, Advocate Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana. Vide this common order, a bunch of 12 Regular First Appeals, details of which are given in the footnote of this judgment, are being decided as all the appeals have arisen out of common acquisition/Award involving identical facts and question of law. For re being taken from RFA No.1480 of 2012 By way of present appeal(s), challenge has been laid to passed by the learned Addl. District (hereinafter to be referred as the ‘Reference Court’). Briefly stating, in the present case(s), land measuring situated within the revenue estate of Village Shahjahanpur, H.B. No. 215, Tehsil and District Jhajjar, was acquired First Appeals, details of which are given in the footnote of this judgment, are being decided as all the appeals have arisen out of common acquisition/Award involving identical facts and question of law. For RFA No.1480 of 2012. By way of present appeal(s), challenge has been laid to passed by the learned Addl. District ’). Briefly stating, in the present case(s), land measuring Village was acquired SANJAY GUPTA 2026.04.16 19:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1480 vide Notifications dated Sections Act’) respectively for the public purpose, namely, “ the ditch drain by the Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘ thereby, provided under the 1894 Act, determined the market value of the acquired land 4. landowners invoked Reference under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, which was decision dated acquired land to statutory benefits/interest under the 1894 Act present appeals were preferred at the instance of landowners 5. through the paper 6. 480-2012 (O&M) and other connected cases vide Notifications dated 20.02.2004 and 09.04.2004 issued under Sections 4 & 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the ‘ ’) respectively for the public purpose, namely, “ the ditch drain”. Award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘ besides granting all other statutory benefits and interests provided under the 1894 Act, determined the market value of the acquired land in the following manner: Land alongwith road upto one acre depth Rs.2,50,000/ Chahi land Rs.2,00,000/ Barani, bhud and gair mumkin land Rs.1,50,000/ Dissatisfied with the Award passed by the LAC, landowners invoked Reference under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, was partly allowed by the learned Reference Court vide its decision dated 30.11.2010, enhancing the market value of the acquired land to Rs.12,50,000/- per acre statutory benefits/interest under the 1894 Act present appeals were preferred at the instance of landowners. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book as well as records. At the outset, it is pertinent to mention that in the given 2 (O&M) and other connected cases [2] 02.2004 and 09.04.2004 issued under 4 & 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the ‘1894 ’) respectively for the public purpose, namely, “for construction of ”. Award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘the LAC’) on 23.11.2004 besides granting all other statutory benefits and interests provided under the 1894 Act, determined the market value of the in the following manner:- Rs.2,50,000/- per acre Rs.2,00,000/- per acre Rs.1,50,000/- per acre Dissatisfied with the Award passed by the LAC, landowners invoked Reference under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, partly allowed by the learned Reference Court vide its enhancing the market value of the per acre besides awarding all other statutory benefits/interest under the 1894 Act. Aggrieved thereof, the present appeals were preferred at the instance of appellants I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone book as well as records. At the outset, it is pertinent to mention that in the given 02.2004 and 09.04.2004 issued under 1894 construction of ”. Award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act was passed 23.11.2004, besides granting all other statutory benefits and interests provided under the 1894 Act, determined the market value of the Dissatisfied with the Award passed by the LAC, landowners invoked Reference under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, partly allowed by the learned Reference Court vide its enhancing the market value of the besides awarding all other Aggrieved thereof, the appellants- I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone At the outset, it is pertinent to mention that in the given SANJAY GUPTA 2026.04.16 19:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1480 facts and circumst record any sale instance Shahjahanpur, District Jhajjar to strengthen their claim towards enhancement of the market value. A perusal of the impugned award dated 30.11.2010 assessed the market value of the acquired land @ acre based on the policy of the government whereby floor rate of the land acquired Rs.12,50,000 State’s own witness that it was an admitted position that the entire area of District Jhajjar, including Village Shahjaha NCR zone. villages, where land was acquired pursuant to the same notification under Section 4 of the market value was was no infirmity or illegality in the deter the acquired land by the learned Reference Court in the present case(s). 7. decision accepted the assessment of compen is equally true that the a appeal(s) 480-2012 (O&M) and other connected cases facts and circumstances, the appellants/landowners failed to record any sale instance pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Shahjahanpur, District Jhajjar to strengthen their claim towards enhancement of the market value. A perusal of the impugned award 30.11.2010 shows that the assessed the market value of the acquired land @ acre based on the policy of the government whereby rate of the land acquired Rs.12,50,000/- per acre. It further emerges from the deposition of the State’s own witness that it was an admitted position that the entire area of District Jhajjar, including Village Shahjaha NCR zone. It was also recorded that villages, where land was acquired pursuant to the same notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act and for the same public purpose, the market value was assessed @ Rs. 12,50,000/ infirmity or illegality in the deter the acquired land by the learned Reference Court in the present Moreover, State did not decision rendered by the learned Reference Court and, thus, accepted the assessment of compensation made therein is equally true that the appellants/claimants who filed (s) failed to prove their case for further enhancement beyond 2 (O&M) and other connected cases [3] ances, the appellants/landowners failed to place on pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Shahjahanpur, District Jhajjar to strengthen their claim towards enhancement of the market value. A perusal of the impugned award he learned Reference Court assessed the market value of the acquired land @ Rs.12,50,000/- per acre based on the policy of the government whereby, the minimum rate of the land acquired in NCR area was fixed It further emerges from the deposition of the State’s own witness that it was an admitted position that the entire area of District Jhajjar, including Village Shahjahanpur, fell within the It was also recorded that in respect of the adjoining villages, where land was acquired pursuant to the same notification and for the same public purpose, the Rs. 12,50,000/- per acre. Thus, there infirmity or illegality in the determination of the market value of the acquired land by the learned Reference Court in the present not prefer any appeal against the rendered by the learned Reference Court and, thus, sation made therein. However, it /claimants who filed the present failed to prove their case for further enhancement beyond place on pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Shahjahanpur, District Jhajjar to strengthen their claim towards enhancement of the market value. A perusal of the impugned award re- per the minimum NCR area was fixed @ It further emerges from the deposition of the State’s own witness that it was an admitted position that the entire within the adjoining villages, where land was acquired pursuant to the same notification and for the same public purpose, the Thus, there mination of the market value of the acquired land by the learned Reference Court in the present st the rendered by the learned Reference Court and, thus, However, it the present failed to prove their case for further enhancement beyond SANJAY GUPTA 2026.04.16 19:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1480 the assessment 8. acquisition matters must be comparable sale instances or other credible material on mere not able to place on recor warranting Court would not be justified in the basis of conjectures, surmises, or hypothetical assumptions. 9. hereinabove, the present appeal(s) being devoid of merits, are hereby dismissed Court is upheld. 10. disposed 06.04.2026 sanjay Sr. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 480-2012 (O&M) and other connected cases the assessment made by the learned It is well-settled that determi acquisition matters must be based comparable sale instances or other credible material mere speculation. In such circumstances, where able to place on record any warranting any interference with the assessed market value, this Court would not be justified in reassessing the basis of conjectures, surmises, or hypothetical assumptions. As such, in the wake of the discussion made hereinabove, the present appeal(s) being devoid of merits, are hereby dismissed and the award passed by the learned Reference Court is upheld. Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. .2026 Whether speaking/reasoned? Whether Reportable? Sr. No. Case No. 1. RFA-1978-2012 (O&M) 2. RFA-1482-2012 (O&M) 3. RFA-1589-2012 (O&M) 4. RFA-6949-2013 (O&M) 5. RFA-2845-2012 (O&M) 6. RFA-6950-2013 (O&M) 7. RFA-1481-2012 (O&M) 8. RFA-1979-2012 (O&M) 2 (O&M) and other connected cases [4] Reference Court. settled that determination of market value in land on tangible evidence such as comparable sale instances or other credible material and cannot rest In such circumstances, where the parties were any cogent and reliable evidence interference with the assessed market value, this reassessing compensation merely on the basis of conjectures, surmises, or hypothetical assumptions. As such, in the wake of the discussion made hereinabove, the present appeal(s) being devoid of merits, are and the award passed by the learned Reference Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Yes/No 2012 (O&M) 2012 (O&M) 2012 (O&M) 2013 (O&M) 2012 (O&M) (O&M) 2012 (O&M) 2012 (O&M) nation of market value in land on tangible evidence such as and cannot rest the parties were cogent and reliable evidence interference with the assessed market value, this compensation merely on As such, in the wake of the discussion made hereinabove, the present appeal(s) being devoid of merits, are and the award passed by the learned Reference Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) SANJAY GUPTA 2026.04.16 19:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1480 9. 10. 11. 06.04.2026 sanjay 480-2012 (O&M) and other connected cases 9. RFA-6951-2013 (O&M) 10. RFA-1886-2012 (O&M) 11. RFA-1885-2012 (O&M) 2026 2 (O&M) and other connected cases [5] 2013 (O&M) 2012 (O&M) 2012 (O&M) (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE (HARKESH MANUJA) SANJAY GUPTA 2026.04.16 19:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document