117 IN TH Sukhdev Ka Land Acquis CORAM: Present: HARKESH CM-2031- applicants market valu applicants further. MAIN APPE appeal pref (for short “ 01.12.1998 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR RFA Date ev Kaur and another Versus Acquisition Collector, Nawanshahr an HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HAR Mr. Jagdip S. Virk, Advocate for the appellants-landowners. Mr. Athar Ahmad, Deputy Advo for the respondents. **** KESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) -CI-1999 Prayer in the present applicati ants-appellants, is for leading additio t value of the land in dispute. After arguing for some time ants-appellants does not press the Dismissed as not pressed. APPEAL The appellants-landowners, preferred under Section 54 of the L hort “1894 Act”), are seeking modi .1998 passed by learned Additional D UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH RFA No. 1069 of 1999 (O&M) Date of Decision: 04.12.2025 ...Appellants ahr and another ...Respondents HARKESH MANUJA ners. Advocate General, Punjab plication moved on behalf of the additional evidence to prove the time, learned counsel for the ss the present application any ers, by instituting the present f the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 modification of the award dated ional District Judge, Nawanshahr DINESH KUMAR 2025.12.09 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document -2- (hereinafter to be referred as “Reference Court”) for enhancement of compensation amount. [2] Briefly, the facts are that in pursuance of Punjab Govt. Notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act issued on 29.10.1992, followed by Notification dated 19.10.1993 under Section 6 thereof, certain land of the appellants-landowners, situated within the revenue estate of Banga, Tehsil Nawanshahr , was acquired. The acquisition was made for public purpose, namely, for the construction of family quarters for the staff and Police Station Banga, Tehsil Nawanshahr. The Land Acquisition Collector, Nawanshahr (for short “LAC”) vide Award No. 1, dated 13.03.1996, assessed market value at the rate of Rs.1,00,000/- per acre for the acquired land alongwith other statutory benefits under the 1894 Act. [3] Dissatisfied with the aforesaid Award, landowners / interested persons filed objection under Section 18 of the Act of 1894, which was dismissed vide decision dated 01.12.1998 by the learned Reference Court. Hence, the present appeal. CONTENTIONS: ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT(S)-LANDOWNER(S) [4] Impugning the aforementioned award dated 01.12.1998, learned counsel for the appellant(s) submits that the learned Reference Court failed to take into account the sale deed dated 12.02.1988 (Ex. P-5) vide which 4 marla of land was sold for Rs. 30,000/- and the base price per acre was Rs. 12,00,000/-. He also points out that the land parcels which formed part of the sale deed- Ex. P-5 was also pertaining to Banga Town, same estate as that of land under acquisition in the present case. He further submits that DINESH KUMAR 2025.12.09 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document -3- after taking into account the sale deed-Ex. P-5, an appreciation at the rate of 12% per annum for the time gap between the said sale deed till the date of notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act in the present case, was required to be applied; followed by a suitable deduction towards smallness of area involved in the said sale transaction and thereafter, the market value should have been re- assessed in favour of the appellants. ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT(S)-STATE OF HARYANA [5] On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent(s)-State of Punjab submits that the impugned award passed by the learned Reference Court was based on proper appreciation of evidence and the pleadings available on record; as such, no modification therein was required and thus, the present appeal was liable to be dismissed. DISCUSSION AND REASONING [6] After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the paper-book / records, I find substance in the submission(s) made on behalf of the appellant(s)-landowner(s). [7] Admittedly, the land under acquisition was situated on the main road leading from Nawanshahr-Banga-Phagwara and thus possessed the locational and potential value attached to it. For the purpose of determination of market value, the appellants-landowners produced the following three sale deeds:- Exhibit Date of Sale Deed Area Amount (Rs.) Price Per Acre (in Rs.) P-2 29.06.1994/ 14.07.1994 0K-15M 1,69,000/- 18,02,666/- P-4 29.04.1994 0K-6½M 1,95,000/- 48,00,000/- P-5 12.02.1988 0K-4M 30,000/- 12,00,000/- DINESH KUMAR 2025.12.09 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document -4- A perusal of the aforesaid chart shows that the sale deeds Ex. P-2 & P-4 are post notification and thus, were rightly discarded, whereas the sale deed dated 12.02.1988 (Ex. P-5) pertains to 4 marla of land and belongs to the same very estate of Banga Town, as that of the land under acquisition and thus, needs to be relied upon for the purpose of determination of market value in the present case. As per sale deed dated 12.02.1988 (Ex. P-5), four marla of land was sold for Rs. 30,000/- with base price per acre being Rs. 12,00,000/-. Since, there has been a time gap of about 4 years and 8 months between the sale deed dated 12.02.1988 (Ex. P-5) and the notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act in the case in hand issued on 29.10.1992 as such, considering the fact that the acquired land was located on the State Highway, an appreciation at the rate of 8% per annum needs to be applied over the base sale price besides making deduction of 60% towards the smallness of area involved in the said sale exemplar-Ex. P-5. In the given facts, a little bit of higher deduction applied in the case in hand also accounts for the fact that a comparative location of the land parcel forming part of the sale deed- Ex. P-5 and the acquired land was not established on record. [8] Moreover, in the given facts and circumstances, no deduction towards the development cost needs to be applied as the acquisition proceedings were carried out for the purpose of construction of family quarters for the staff and Police Station Banga, Tehsil Nawanshahr and the State did not suffer any loss of land nor even incurred any cost towards providing of additional infrastructural amenities. DINESH KUMAR 2025.12.09 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document -5- [9] Accordingly, in view of the discussion made hereinabove, by applying appreciation for the time gap between the date of sale exemplar dated 12.02.1988 (Ex. P-5) and the date of notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act issued on 29.10.1992, the market value of the acquired land as on the date of notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act, comes to Rs. 6,59,200/- per acre, as per calculation below:- Description Amount per acre (in Rs.) Market Value of the acquired land (as per sale deed dated 12.02.1988 / Ex. P-5) 12,00,000.00 Add: Appreciation @ 8% per annum (Rs.12,00,000 x 8/100 x 56/12) (from 12.02.1988 to 29.10.1992 = 4 years and 8 months, i.e. 56 months) 4,48,000.00 16,48,000.00 Less: Deduction @ 60% towards smallness of area (Rs. 16,48,000 x 60/100) 9,88,800.00 6,59,200.00 Net Compensation 6,59,200.00 DECISION [10] In view of the aforesaid discussion, impugned award dated 01.12.1998 passed by the learned Reference Court is modified and the appellants-landowners are held entitled for award of market value at the rate of Rs. 6,59,200/- per acre. The appellant(s)- landowner(s) are also awarded consequential / statutory benefits and interest as provided in the 1894 Act (as amended up-to-date), especially the interest on solatium as well. [11] Also, wherever the landowner(s) has/have unfortunately died in the appeal(s) / cross-objection(s) after filing thereof and the legal representatives 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. DINESH KUMAR 2025.12.09 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document -6- [12] Disposed off accordingly. [13] Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand(s) disposed off. December 04, 2025 ( HARKESH MANUJA ) ‘dk kamra’ JUDGE DINESH KUMAR 2025.12.09 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document