1 217 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH SATNAM SINGH AND ORS STATE OF HARYANA & ORS AMARJEET KAUR AND ORS STATE OFHARYANA AND ANR CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr. Sandeep Punchhi, Advocate for the appellants in RFA Mr. in RFA Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana. HARKESH MANUJA, Vide this common order, aforesaid two Regular First Appeals shall stand disposed of. For convenience the facts a 6494-2015. By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgment dated 03.08.2012 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sirsa, whereby the reference petition filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 appellants-landowners, seeking enhancement of compensation was partly allowed. 2. Briefly stating, land measuring 16 acres, 4 kanals and 3 marlas, situated within the revenue estate of Village Shamshabad, Tehs and District Sirsa was acquired for the public purpose for construct Sewerage Treatment Plant. ‘LAC’) passed Award No.4 dated 10.11.2010 assessing the total market value at the rate of Rs.7,19,12,530/ RFA-6494 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: January SATNAM SINGH AND ORS Versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS AMARJEET KAUR AND ORS Versus STATE OFHARYANA AND ANR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Sandeep Punchhi, Advocate for the appellants in RFA-6494-2015. Mr. Gurdarshan S. Sidhu, Advocate for the appellants RFA-2099-2014. Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) Vide this common order, aforesaid two Regular First Appeals shall stand disposed of. For convenience the facts a By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgment dated 03.08.2012 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sirsa, whereby the reference petition filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the landowners, seeking enhancement of compensation was Briefly stating, land measuring 16 acres, 4 kanals and 3 marlas, situated within the revenue estate of Village Shamshabad, Tehs and District Sirsa was acquired for the public purpose for construct Sewerage Treatment Plant. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘LAC’) passed Award No.4 dated 10.11.2010 assessing the total market value at the rate of Rs.7,19,12,530/- i.e. Rs.30,00,000/ 6494-2015 and RFA-2099-2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA-6494-2015 Date of Decision: January 16, 2026 ......Appellants .....Respondents RFA-2099-2014 …..Appellants ....Respondents HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Sandeep Punchhi, Advocate for the appellants Gurdarshan S. Sidhu, Advocate for the appellants Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana. Vide this common order, aforesaid two Regular First Appeals shall stand disposed of. For convenience the facts are drawn from RFA- By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgment dated 03.08.2012 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sirsa, whereby the reference petition filed under Section 18 of the (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the landowners, seeking enhancement of compensation was Briefly stating, land measuring 16 acres, 4 kanals and 3 marlas, situated within the revenue estate of Village Shamshabad, Tehsil and District Sirsa was acquired for the public purpose for construction of The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘LAC’) passed Award No.4 dated 10.11.2010 assessing the total market . Rs.30,00,000/- per acre. 2015 , 2026 2014 Vide this common order, aforesaid two Regular First Appeals - By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgment dated 03.08.2012 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sirsa, whereby the reference petition filed under Section 18 of the (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the landowners, seeking enhancement of compensation was Briefly stating, land measuring 16 acres, 4 kanals and 3 il ion of The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘LAC’) passed Award No.4 dated 10.11.2010 assessing the total market TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.01.19 18:01 I agree to specified portions of this document 2 RFA-6494-2015 and RFA-2099-2014 3. The appellant-landowner, feeling dissatisfied with the award, sought reference under Section 18 of the Act pleading that the acquired land was of commercial nature as the adjacent land was being used for the purpose of Seed Factory. It was further pleaded that even otherwise the market value of the land was not less than Rs. 80,00,000/- per acre. 4. Upon notice, the same was contested by the respondents by way of filing a joint written statement contending that the petitioners concealed the true facts from the Court and petition was barred for non- joinder and mis-joinder of necessary parties. 5. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by learned Reference Court on 20.01.2012:- “1. What was the prevailing market price of the acquired land as on the date of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act? OPP 2. Whether petitioners are entitled to enhancement of compensation, on the grounds is alleged in the petition? OPP 3. Whether the present petition is not maintainable in the present form and the petitioners have no cause of action and locus standi to file the petition? OPR 4. Relief.” 6. After considering the evidence, the learned Additional District Judge, Sirsa, vide award dated 03.08.2012 enhanced the amount of compensation to Rs.39,00,000/- per acre. 7. Aggrieved of the aforesaid award dated 03.08.2012 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sirsa, the appellants-landowners filed the present appeal. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book. 9. A perusal of the record shows that based on the sale deed Ex.P-6 dated 08.09.2009 pertaining to 5 marlas 8 sirsai of land forming part of the same revenue estate of village Shamshabad against sale consideration of Rs.1,14,000/- with base price per acre of Rs.40,00,000/-, the appellants-landowners were awarded the benefit of re-assessment of market value to the tune of Rs.39,00,000/- per acre over the acquired land notified on 07.08.2009 under Section 4 of the Act. Further, no other material evidence has been brought to the notice of the Court so as to TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.01.19 18:01 I agree to specified portions of this document 3 RFA-6494-2015 and RFA-2099-2014 call for any interference with the well-reasoned finding recorded by the learned Reference Court based on proper appreciation of pleadings and the evidence available on record while making assessment of just and fair market value to be assessed to the landowners-appellants. 10. In such circumstances, the award dated 03.08.2012 passed by the learned Reference Court calls for no interference. Resultantly, the appeals preferred at the instance of landowners are dismissed. It may be noticed here that the appeals preferred at the instance of respondent- State already stands dismissed vide judgment dated 14.12.2012 passed in RFA-6873 of 2012. 11. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 16.01.2026 (HARKESH MANUJA) Tejwinder JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.01.19 18:01 I agree to specified portions of this document