RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 120 ANGREJ SINGH ANGREJ SINGH ANGREJ SINGH ANGREJ SINGH Vs Vs Vs Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: HON'BLE HON'BLE HON'BLE HON'BLE Present: Mr. for the appellant(s) Mr. Athar Ahmed, DAG, Punjab. HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) CM No.582 CM No.582 CM No.582 CM No.582----CI of 2013 CI of 2013 CI of 2013 CI of 2013 Learned counsel for the applleant(s) application. Dismissed as not pressed. Main case(s) Main case(s) Main case(s) Main case(s) [1]. Vide this common order, the present appeals bearing RFA Nos. 2348, 408, 409, 410, 411, 412 of 2013 and 634 of 2016 as all these appeals have arisen out of common acquisition and involve identical facts and questions of law. For the sake of brevity, facts are being taken from No. No. No. No.407 407 407 407 of of of of 201 201 201 2013333.... RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH RFA No. RFA No. RFA No. RFA No.407 407 407 407 with with with with other connected cases other connected cases other connected cases other connected cases Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: ANGREJ SINGH ANGREJ SINGH ANGREJ SINGH ANGREJ SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. HON'BLE HON'BLE HON'BLE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ Mr. Sukhwinder Singh Chatrath, Advocate for the appellant(s). Mr. Athar Ahmed, DAG, Punjab. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) CI of 2013 CI of 2013 CI of 2013 CI of 2013 in RFA No.407 of 2013 in RFA No.407 of 2013 in RFA No.407 of 2013 in RFA No.407 of 2013 Learned counsel for the applleant(s) Dismissed as not pressed. Vide this common order, the present appeals bearing RFA Nos. 2348, 408, 409, 410, 411, 412 of 2013 and 634 of 2016 as all these appeals have arisen out of common acquisition and involve identical facts and questions of law. For the sake of brevity, facts are being taken from .... RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH 407 407 407 407 of of of of 201 201 201 2013333 (O&M) (O&M) (O&M) (O&M) other connected cases other connected cases other connected cases other connected cases Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: 01 01 01 01....00005555.202 .202 .202 .2026666 ..... ..... ..... .....Appellant Appellant Appellant Appellant .........Respondent .Respondent .Respondent .Respondentssss MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJAAAA , Advocate in RFA No.407 of 2013 in RFA No.407 of 2013 in RFA No.407 of 2013 in RFA No.407 of 2013 Learned counsel for the applleant(s) does not press the present Vide this common order, the present appeals bearing RFA Nos.407, 2348, 408, 409, 410, 411, 412 of 2013 and 634 of 2016 (O&M) are being decided as all these appeals have arisen out of common acquisition and involve identical facts and questions of law. For the sake of brevity, facts are being taken from RFA RFA RFA RFA 1 does not press the present 407, being decided as all these appeals have arisen out of common acquisition and involve identical RFA RFA RFA RFA MOHMED ATIK 2026.05.05 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases [2]. By way of present appeal(s), challenge has been laid dated 17.04.2012 (hereinafter to be referred as the ‘ [3]. Briefly stating, in the present case(s), appellant(s)/landowner Malout, District Sri Muktsar Sahib, 27.08.2009 and Act, 1894 (for namely,“for the construction of loading to Bam Drain RD 67525 passed by the Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘ whereby market value of the acquired land was assesse for Nehri land along with granting all other statutory benefits under the 1894 Act. [4]. Aggrieved thereof, the appellant(s)/landowner(s) preferred their objections in terms of Section 18 of the 1894 Act which were referred to the learned Reference Court, which came to be partly accepted vide its award dated 17.04.2012, while @ Rs.4,50,000/ statutory benefits under the 1894 Act. [5]. Still aggrieved the appellant(s)/ RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases By way of present appeal(s), challenge has been laid .2012 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, after to be referred as the ‘Reference Court Reference Court Reference Court Reference Court Briefly stating, in the present case(s), landowner(s), situated within the revenue estate of village , District Sri Muktsar Sahib, was acquired vide Notification and 22.09.2009 issued under Section r short the ‘1894 1894 1894 1894 Act Act Act Act’’’’) respectively the construction of Sherewala Link Drain from RD loading to Bam Drain RD 67525”. Award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘ whereby market value of the acquired land was assesse along with granting all other statutory benefits under the 1894 Act. Aggrieved thereof, the appellant(s)/landowner(s) preferred their objections in terms of Section 18 of the 1894 Act which were referred to the learned Reference Court, which came to be partly accepted vide its award dated while re-assessing the market value of the acquired land ,000/- per acre irrespective of its nature besides granting all other statutory benefits under the 1894 Act. Still aggrieved, the present appeals were preferred at the instance of /landowner(s). RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases By way of present appeal(s), challenge has been laid to the Award Addl. District Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib Reference Court Reference Court Reference Court Reference Court’). Briefly stating, in the present case(s), certain land owned by the the revenue estate of village Bam, Tehsil acquired vide Notifications dated under Sections 4 & 6 of the Land Acquisition respectively for the public purpose wala Link Drain from RD-0-17480 out Award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘the LAC the LAC the LAC the LAC’) on 25.08.2010 whereby market value of the acquired land was assessed @ Rs.4,00,000/- per acre along with granting all other statutory benefits under the 1894 Act. Aggrieved thereof, the appellant(s)/landowner(s) preferred their objections in terms of Section 18 of the 1894 Act which were referred to the learned Reference Court, which came to be partly accepted vide its award dated market value of the acquired land per acre irrespective of its nature besides granting all other , the present appeals were preferred at the instance of 2 to the Award Sri Muktsar Sahib certain land owned by the Bam, Tehsil dated Land Acquisition public purpose, 17480 out Award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act was 08.2010, per acre along with granting all other statutory benefits under the 1894 Act. Aggrieved thereof, the appellant(s)/landowner(s) preferred their objections in terms of Section 18 of the 1894 Act which were referred to the learned Reference Court, which came to be partly accepted vide its award dated market value of the acquired land per acre irrespective of its nature besides granting all other , the present appeals were preferred at the instance of MOHMED ATIK 2026.05.05 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases DISCUSSION AND REASONING: DISCUSSION AND REASONING: DISCUSSION AND REASONING: DISCUSSION AND REASONING: [6]. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper books as well as records of the case(s). [7]. At the outset, it is pertinent to mention that circumstances, the appellant instance pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Sri Muktsar Sahib value. [8]. Moreover, State did not prefer any appeal against the decision rendered by the learned Reference Court and, thus, assessment of compensation made therein. However, it is equally true that the appellant(s)/claimant for further enhancement beyond the assessment made by the learned Reference Court. [9]. It is well matters must be based on tangible evidence such as other credible material and cannot rest on mere speculation. In such circumstances, where the parties were not able to place on record any cogent and reliable evidence warranting any interference with the assessed market value, be justified in enhancing compensation merely on the basis of conjectures, surmises, or hypothetical assumptions. RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases DISCUSSION AND REASONING: DISCUSSION AND REASONING: DISCUSSION AND REASONING: DISCUSSION AND REASONING: ---- I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper books as well as records of the case(s). At the outset, it is pertinent to mention that circumstances, the appellant(s)/landowner(s) failed to place on record any sale instance pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Sri Muktsar Sahib to substantiate their claim towards enhancement of the market oreover, State did not prefer any appeal against the decision rendered by the learned Reference Court and, thus, assessment of compensation made therein. However, it is equally true that the /claimant(s), who filed the present appeal(s) failed to prove their case for further enhancement beyond the assessment made by the learned Reference It is well-settled that determination of market value in land acquisition matters must be based on tangible evidence such as other credible material and cannot rest on mere speculation. In such circumstances, where the parties were not able to place on record any cogent and reliable evidence warranting any interference with the assessed market value, be justified in enhancing compensation merely on the basis of conjectures, surmises, or hypothetical assumptions. RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the At the outset, it is pertinent to mention that in the given facts and failed to place on record any sale instance pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Bam, Tehsil Malout, District their claim towards enhancement of the market oreover, State did not prefer any appeal against the decision rendered by the learned Reference Court and, thus, in a way accepted the assessment of compensation made therein. However, it is equally true that the sent appeal(s) failed to prove their case for further enhancement beyond the assessment made by the learned Reference settled that determination of market value in land acquisition matters must be based on tangible evidence such as comparable sale instances or other credible material and cannot rest on mere speculation. In such circumstances, where the parties were not able to place on record any cogent and reliable evidence warranting any interference with the assessed market value, this Court would not be justified in enhancing compensation merely on the basis of conjectures, 3 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the the given facts and failed to place on record any sale Bam, Tehsil Malout, District their claim towards enhancement of the market oreover, State did not prefer any appeal against the decision accepted the assessment of compensation made therein. However, it is equally true that the sent appeal(s) failed to prove their case for further enhancement beyond the assessment made by the learned Reference settled that determination of market value in land acquisition comparable sale instances or other credible material and cannot rest on mere speculation. In such circumstances, where the parties were not able to place on record any cogent and reliable evidence this Court would not be justified in enhancing compensation merely on the basis of conjectures, MOHMED ATIK 2026.05.05 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases [10]. In view of the discussion made hereinabove and in the absence of any evidence on record placed by the appellant(s)/ potentiality and locational advantages of the acquired land so as to warrant a re-assessment or enhancement of the market value, the award passed by the learned Reference Court no interference, the same being based on a proper appreciation of the material available on record [11]. However, it may be noticed here that the learned Reference Court declined the damages again there was no evidence in the form of site plan to establish the same. On the contrary, a perusal of proved on record by the appellant(s)/landowner(s) to establish that their land holdings were bifurcated as an effect of acquisition in to counter the same factum of bifurcation of land holdings of the appellant(s)/landowner(s) as an effect of acquisition of land in the case(s) in hand. [12]. In the present case(s), the acquisition has been carried out for the public purpose, namely, 17480 out loading to Bam Drain RD 67525” land owned by the appellant acquisition proceedings, some part of it came on the other side of circumstances, the appellant cultivation of land besides causing them inconvenience towards connectivity of the RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases In view of the discussion made hereinabove and in the absence of any record placed by the appellant(s)/ potentiality and locational advantages of the acquired land so as to warrant a assessment or enhancement of the market value, the award passed by the learned Reference Court re-assessing the market value no interference, the same being based on a proper appreciation of the material available on record. However, it may be noticed here that the learned Reference Court declined the damages against the severance of land holdings while recording that there was no evidence in the form of site plan to establish the same. On the perusal of the records shows that a site plan proved on record by the appellant(s)/landowner(s) to establish that their land holdings were bifurcated as an effect of acquisition in to counter the same was produced on record by the respondent/State to dispute th factum of bifurcation of land holdings of the appellant(s)/landowner(s) as an effect of acquisition of land in the case(s) in hand. In the present case(s), the acquisition has been carried out for the public purpose, namely,“for the construction of Sherewala Link Drain from RD 17480 out loading to Bam Drain RD 67525”. which has resulted into bifurcation of land owned by the appellant(s)/landowner(s) acquisition proceedings, some part of it came on the other side of circumstances, the appellant(s)/landowner(s) are bound to suffer loss towards cultivation of land besides causing them inconvenience towards connectivity of the RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases In view of the discussion made hereinabove and in the absence of any record placed by the appellant(s)/landowner(s) with regard to the potentiality and locational advantages of the acquired land so as to warrant a assessment or enhancement of the market value, the award passed by the learned ssing the market value @ Rs.4,50,000/- per acre calls for no interference, the same being based on a proper appreciation of the material However, it may be noticed here that the learned Reference Court st the severance of land holdings while recording that there was no evidence in the form of site plan to establish the same. On the records shows that a site plan in the form of Ex.P-1 was proved on record by the appellant(s)/landowner(s) to establish that their land holdings were bifurcated as an effect of acquisition in case(s) in hand. No evidence produced on record by the respondent/State to dispute th factum of bifurcation of land holdings of the appellant(s)/landowner(s) as an effect In the present case(s), the acquisition has been carried out for the of Sherewala Link Drain from RD . which has resulted into bifurcation of ) and as a result of the present acquisition proceedings, some part of it came on the other side of the drain. In such are bound to suffer loss towards cultivation of land besides causing them inconvenience towards connectivity of the 4 In view of the discussion made hereinabove and in the absence of any with regard to the potentiality and locational advantages of the acquired land so as to warrant any assessment or enhancement of the market value, the award passed by the learned per acre calls for no interference, the same being based on a proper appreciation of the material However, it may be noticed here that the learned Reference Court st the severance of land holdings while recording that there was no evidence in the form of site plan to establish the same. On the 1 was proved on record by the appellant(s)/landowner(s) to establish that their land . No evidence produced on record by the respondent/State to dispute the factum of bifurcation of land holdings of the appellant(s)/landowner(s) as an effect In the present case(s), the acquisition has been carried out for the of Sherewala Link Drain from RD-0- . which has resulted into bifurcation of and as a result of the present In such are bound to suffer loss towards cultivation of land besides causing them inconvenience towards connectivity of the MOHMED ATIK 2026.05.05 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases two parcels left on either side of in value of remaining land due to alteration in access, useability, irregularity of shape and loss of agricultural viability etc., as such, it damages on account of landowner(s) especially in the wake of site plan being part of the evidence reflecting the division of land holdings of the appellant(s)/landowner(s) as an effect of acquisition in hand, as such they are held entitled for award of damages @ 3 of the market value all other statutory benefits/interest thereupon. [13]. Consequently appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms. [14]. Wherever 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) be [15]. All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. May 01 May 01 May 01 May 01, , , , 20 20 20 2026 26 26 26 Atik Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases two parcels left on either side of drain. Moreover, severance also causes r in value of remaining land due to alteration in access, useability, irregularity of shape and loss of agricultural viability etc., as such, it on account of severance of land in favour of the especially in the wake of site plan being part of the evidence reflecting the division of land holdings of the appellant(s)/landowner(s) as an effect of acquisition in hand, as such they are held entitled for award of damages @ 3 et value as assessed by the learned Reference Court all other statutory benefits/interest thereupon. Consequently, in view of the discussion made hereinabove, appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Wherever the landowner(s) has/have unfortunately expired in the 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. All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases RFA Nos.407 of 2013 (O&M) with connected cases 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., as such, it is appropriate to award severance of land in favour of the appellant(s)/ especially in the wake of site plan being part of the evidence reflecting the division of land holdings of the appellant(s)/landowner(s) as an effect of acquisition in hand, as such they are held entitled for award of damages @ 3 as assessed by the learned Reference Court besides award of , in view of the discussion made hereinabove, all the the landowner(s) has/have unfortunately expired in the 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 fore the learned Executing Court. All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE 5 eduction in value of remaining land due to alteration in access, useability, irregularity of appropriate to award appellant(s)/ especially in the wake of site plan being part of the evidence reflecting the division of land holdings of the appellant(s)/landowner(s) as an effect of acquisition in hand, as such they are held entitled for award of damages @ 30% besides award of all the the landowner(s) has/have unfortunately expired in the 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 MOHMED ATIK 2026.05.05 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment