108 (2 cases IN TH (1) Mohinder S State of Pun (2) Davinder Si State of Pun CORAM: Present: HARKESH bearing RFA out of comm [2] appeal(s) 1894 (for s 28.04.1999 ases) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR RFA Date der Singh and others Versus of Punjab and others AND RFA der Singh and others Versus of Punjab and others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HAR Mr. Paramjit Singh Brar, Advoc for the appellant(s)-landowner( Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Additional A for the respondents (in both ca **** KESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) This order shall dispose off g RFA Nos. 3290 of 1999; and 169 common acquisition/award. The appellant(s)-landowner(s) preferred under Section 54 of (for short “1894 Act”), seek modif .1999 passed by learned Additiona UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH RFA No. 3290 of 1999 (O&M) Date of Decision: 27.11.2025 ...Appellants ...Respondents RFA No. 169 of 2000 (O&M) ...Appellants ...Respondents HARKESH MANUJA Advocate wner(s) (in both cases). ional Advocate General, Punjab cases). e off the present two appeals 169 of 2000, as the same arise (s), by instituting the present 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, modification of the award dated ditional District Judge, Faridkot DINESH KUMAR 2025.12.02 11:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document -2- (hereinafter to be referred as “Reference Court”) for enhancement of compensation amount. [3] In the present case, some land owned by the appellant(s)-landowner(s) situated within the revenue estate of Village Chak Kala Singh Wala, Tehsil and District Muktsar came to be acquired vide Notifications issued under Sections 4 & 6 of the 1894 Act on 20.10.1987 & 30.06.1988 respectively for the public purpose, namely, “for construction of a link drain of Village Fattanwala; followed by Award No. 302 dated 29.12.1990 passed by the Land Acquisition Collector (for short “LAC”), whereby the market value of the acquired land was assessed @ Rs.20,000/- per acre for Nehri and Gair Mumkin land alongwith other statutory benefits. [4] Aggrieved of the assessment made by the LAC, the appellant(s)-landowner(s) preferred reference petition(s) under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, which came to be disposed off vide Award dated 28.04.1999, while assessing the market value of land at the rate of Rs. 50,000/- per acre; Rs. 6,000/- on account of severance charges alongwith other benefits. [5] Being dissatisfied with the determination made by the learned Reference Court, the appellant(s)-landowner(s) are in the present appeal. [6] I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book/relevant record. [7] A perusal of the judgment passed by the learned Reference Court shows that in a previous LAC’s award dated 02.06.1994 (Ex. P-3/A) pertaining to the acquisition proceedings carried out for the same revenue estate of Village Chak Kala Singh DINESH KUMAR 2025.12.02 11:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document -3- Wala, wherein notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act was issued on 28.03.1989, the market value of the land was assessed @ Rs.80,000/- per acre. The learned Reference Court, while determining the market value of the land in the case in hand, after taking into consideration that the drain is a tributary to the main drain, upon application for doctrine of de-escalation from 28.03.1989 to 27.10.1987, rightly assessed the market value of land at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per acre, instead of Rs. 20,000/- per acre, at the time of notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act in the case in hand, i.e. 20.10.1987. Even, the appellants have also been granted solatium at the rate of 30% on the enhanced compensation, besides awarding Rs. 6,000/- on account of severance of their three acres of land i.e. at the rate of Rs. 2,000/- per acre of severed land. Moreover, the appellants were granted interest at the rate of 9% per annum for the first year i.e. 01.03.1981 to 28.02.1982 and at the rate of 15% per annum thereafter i.e. from 01.03.1982 till the date of payment on the enhanced amount of compensation. [8] Considering the above, no interference is called for in the impugned award passed by the learned Reference Court, thus, present appeals being devoid of merits, are hereby dismissed. [9] Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand(s) disposed off. November 27, 2025 ( HARKESH MANUJA ) ‘dk kamra’ JUDGE DINESH KUMAR 2025.12.02 11:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document