RFA-2545-2014 & connected cases -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 106+104 (4 cases) RFA-2545-2014 Date of Decision: 21.07.2026 Sunil Chaudhary and others …Appellants Versus State of Haryana and others …Respondents With Sr. No. Case No. Appellant(s) Respondent(s) 2. RFA-3393-2014 Umesh and others State of Haryana and others 3. RFA-3829-2014 Dhan Singh and others State of Haryana and others 4. RFA-3522-2013 (O&M) Om Parkash and others State of Haryana and others 5. RFA-3519-2013 Nafe Singh and others State of Haryana and others 6. RFA-3521-2013 Sudesh @ Suresh State of Haryana and others CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present: - Mr. Amit Siwach, Advocate and Mr. Vikram Punia, Advocate for the appellants (in RFA-2545-2014 & RFA-3829-2014) Mr. Raj Karan Singh Verka, Advocate and Mr. Bhupender Singh, Advocate for the appellants (in RFA-3519-2013, RFA-3521-2013, RFA-3522-2013 & RFA-3393-2014) Mr. Abhinash Jain, Additional Advocate General, Haryana *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral) 1. As common issues are involved in the captioned appeals, with the consent of both sides, the same are hereby disposed of by this common MOHIT KUMAR 2026.07.21 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RFA-2545-2014 & connected cases -2- order. For the sake of brevity and convenience, facts are borrowed from RFA No.2545 of 2014. 2. The appellants through instant appeal are seeking modification of award dated 20.09.2013 whereby learned Additional District Judge, Sonipat has not awarded compensation as claimed by them. 3. The State Government issued notification dated 08.07.2008 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘1894 Act’) for acquisition of land situated within the revenue estate of village Sewli, Tehsil & District Sonipat for development of residential and commercial Sectors 65, 66, 67 & 68, Sonipat. The said notification was followed by notification dated 10.07.2008 issued under Section 6 of 1894 Act. 4. The Collector vide award dated 19.05.2010, in terms of provisions of 1894 Act, determined compensation payable to landowners. Market value of the acquired land was determined as ₹16,00,000/- per acre. Landowners were held entitled to solatium and other statutory benefits. Feeling dis-satisfied from aforesaid award, landowners preferred petitions before the Collector which were referred to Court under Section 18 of the 1894 Act. 5. The landowners as well as State, in support of their contentions, led their evidence. The State attempted to justify market value determined by Collector, however, landowners vehemently pleaded that value of their land has been assessed on lower side. 6. The Reference Court, appreciating evidence led by both sides, by impugned common award adjudicated reference petitions. The Reference Court has assessed market value of acquired land @ ₹36,68,000/- per acre. MOHIT KUMAR 2026.07.21 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RFA-2545-2014 & connected cases -3- In this way, the Reference Court has enhanced market value from ₹16,00,000/- per acre (determined by Collector) to ₹36,68,000/- per acre. The landowners are in appeal before this Court. 7. Learned counsel for appellants submit that in the same village i.e. Sewli, District Sonipat, land was acquired vide notification 17.11.2005. Market value of said land was determined by this Court @ ₹31,50,000/- per acre. Order of this Court stands upheld by Hon’ble Supreme Court. By notification dated 15.04.2009 another piece of land was acquired. Market value of said land was determined @ ₹47,64,375/- per acre. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ram Kishan v. State of Haryana, 2025 SCC OnLine 715 has approved escalation and de-escalation @ 12% per annum. Applying the said principle, value of land in question comes to ₹42 Lakhs per acre. 8. Learned State counsel expressed his inability to controvert afore-stated factual and legal position. 9. Heard the arguments and perused the record. 10. Concededly, value of land acquired in 2005 was determined ₹31,50,000/- per acre. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ram Krishan (supra) has applied principle of 12% escalation and de-escalation to determine market value of the acquired land. Land in question falls within the same village which was subject matter of acquisition in November’ 2005. Applying the aforesaid principle, market value of land in question comes to approximately ₹42 Lakhs per acre. 11. In the backdrop, this Court is of the considered opinion that impugned award deserves to be modified. Accordingly, impugned award stands modified to the extent that market value of the land in question is MOHIT KUMAR 2026.07.21 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RFA-2545-2014 & connected cases -4- assessed @ ₹42 Lakhs per acre. The Court is conscious of the fact that market value of land acquired in April’ 2009 was determined @ ₹47,64,375/- per acre. The appellants shall be entitled to statutory benefits as provided under 1894 Act. 12. Disposed of in above terms. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 21.07.2026 Mohit Kumar Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MOHIT KUMAR 2026.07.21 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.