RFA-762 104 (2 cases) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 1. Smt. Maha Devi (since deceased) through her LRs State of Haryana 2. State of Haryana Smt. Mahadevi CORAM: Present: HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) appeals by way of a common order as identical facts are involved therein. For convenience, facts are being -1998. 2. laid to the decision dated District Judge, Kaithal 762-1998 and anr. [1] 104 (2 cases) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** Date of Decision: RFA No. Smt. Maha Devi (since deceased) through her LRs Versus State of Haryana RFA No. State of Haryana Versus Smt. Mahadevi CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr. V.K. Jindal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocate for the respondent(s) in RFA for the appellants in RFA-762 Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana for the appellant in RFA-571 for the respondent in RFA- --- HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) This order of mine shall dispose of above said appeals by way of a common order as identical facts are involved therein. For convenience, facts are being By way of filing the present appeal the decision dated 24.12.1997 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Kaithal-cum-Reference Court IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 18.08.2025 RFA No. 762 of 1998 (O&M) Smt. Maha Devi (since deceased) through her LRs …….Appellants Versus .….Respondent RFA No. 571 of 1998 (O&M) …….Appellant Versus ..….Respondent HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr. V.K. Jindal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocate the respondent(s) in RFA-571-1998 and 762-1998. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana 571-1998 and -762-1998. This order of mine shall dispose of above said two appeals by way of a common order as identical facts are involved therein. For convenience, facts are being culled out from RFA No.762 way of filing the present appeal(s) challenge has been 24.12.1997 passed by learned Additional Reference Court. two appeals by way of a common order as identical facts are involved 762 challenge has been 24.12.1997 passed by learned Additional SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.25 18:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-762 3. situated within the revenue estate of Village Fatehpur, Hadbast No.8, Tehsil and District Kaithal was notification dated 28.8.1995, published on 31. 4 of the construction Collector acquired land @ for standing crops; thereby awarding total compensation of Rs. 10,48,947/ additional amount @ 12% per annum. 4. filed objection compensation prevailing market value. 5. Kaithal, after examining and taking into consideration the material available on record vide order dated 24.12.1997 awarded/enhanced the market value amount @ 12% per annum on commencing from 31.08.1995 i.e. the date of publication of notification issued under on said market value. The 9% per annum on the enhanced compensation for a period of one 762-1998 and anr. [2] Brief facts of the case are that 32K situated within the revenue estate of Village Fatehpur, Hadbast No.8, Tehsil and District Kaithal was sought to be otification dated 28.8.1995, published on 31. 4 of the 1894 Act, for short ‘the Act’, construction of Frozen Semen Bank, Fatehpur. Collector (for short ‘the LAC’) assessed the market value of the acquired land @ Rs. 1,80,000/- per acre for standing crops; thereby awarding total compensation of Rs. 10,48,947/- for the acquired land; besides 30% solatium and additional amount @ 12% per annum. Feeling aggrieved, predecessor filed objections under Section 18 of the Act pleading that the compensation assessed by the LAC prevailing market value. The learned Reference Court Kaithal, after examining and taking into consideration the material available on record vide order dated 24.12.1997 awarded/enhanced market value to Rs. 250/- per square yards, alongwith further amount @ 12% per annum on the commencing from 31.08.1995 i.e. the date of publication of ication issued under Section 4 of the Act; besides 30% solatium on said market value. The appellants were also awarded 9% per annum on the enhanced compensation for a period of one of the case are that 32K-18M acres of land situated within the revenue estate of Village Fatehpur, Hadbast No.8, sought to be acquired vide Govt. otification dated 28.8.1995, published on 31.08.1995, under Section for short ‘the Act’, for public purpose, namely of Frozen Semen Bank, Fatehpur. The Land Acquisition (for short ‘the LAC’) assessed the market value of the per acre and further gave Rs.20,000 for standing crops; thereby awarding total compensation of Rs. for the acquired land; besides 30% solatium and additional amount @ 12% per annum. predecessor-in-interest of appellants under Section 18 of the Act pleading that the LAC was inadequate in view the Reference Court-cum-Addl.District Judge, Kaithal, after examining and taking into consideration the material available on record vide order dated 24.12.1997 awarded/enhanced per square yards, alongwith further the said value for the period commencing from 31.08.1995 i.e. the date of publication of the Section 4 of the Act; besides 30% solatium appellants were also awarded interest @ 9% per annum on the enhanced compensation for a period of one 18M acres of land situated within the revenue estate of Village Fatehpur, Hadbast No.8, vide Govt. 8.1995, under Section namely, Land Acquisition (for short ‘the LAC’) assessed the market value of the Rs.20,000/- for standing crops; thereby awarding total compensation of Rs. for the acquired land; besides 30% solatium and interest of appellants under Section 18 of the Act pleading that the in view the Addl.District Judge, Kaithal, after examining and taking into consideration the material available on record vide order dated 24.12.1997 awarded/enhanced per square yards, alongwith further said value for the period the Section 4 of the Act; besides 30% solatium interest @ 9% per annum on the enhanced compensation for a period of one SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.25 18:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-762 year and thereafter @ 15% till the amount of compensation deposited 6. preferred dissatisfied with the award passed by the learned Reference Court filed RFA No. 571 7. Counsel went wrong having discarded the sale exemplars proved on record as Exs. P-2 to P Senior counsel submits that the sale instances Exs. P pertaining to land forming part of rect. No. 215, Hadbast No. 8 of Village Fatehpur, Tehsil and District Kaithal assessing market value of of nearby Kaithal. Learned Senior counsel also points out that since the acquisition in the present case was relating to a small chunk of land measuring 32 kanals 18 ma construction of Frozen Semen Bank at Fathpur as such even no cut towards development exemplars decision o State of Haryana sale price were required 762-1998 and anr. [3] year and thereafter @ 15% till the amount of compensation posited with the Reference Court. Seeking further enhancement, the appellants preferred RFA No. 762-1998, while satisfied with the award passed by the learned Reference Court filed RFA No. 571-1998. Impugning the aforementioned Award, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the Reference Court went wrong having discarded the sale exemplars proved on record as 2 to P-6 while making assessment of market value. Learned nior counsel submits that the sale instances Exs. P pertaining to land forming part of rect. No. 215, Hadbast No. 8 of Village Fatehpur, Tehsil and District Kaithal were to be taken into account while assessing market value of the land unde nearby Rect. Nos.213 & 214, Hadbast No. 8, Tehsil and District Kaithal. Learned Senior counsel also points out that since the acquisition in the present case was relating to a small chunk of land measuring 32 kanals 18 marlas for the public purpose, namely, for construction of Frozen Semen Bank at Fathpur as such even no cut towards development expense was required to be applied exemplars. Learned Senior counsel also submits that in view of latest decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana, 2024 INSC 797, the same exemplar fetching highest sale price were required to be considered while assessing the market year and thereafter @ 15% till the amount of compensation was Seeking further enhancement, the appellants-landowners , while the respondent-State being satisfied with the award passed by the learned Reference Court Impugning the aforementioned Award, learned Senior for the appellants submits that the Reference Court went wrong having discarded the sale exemplars proved on record as making assessment of market value. Learned nior counsel submits that the sale instances Exs. P-2 to P-4 & P pertaining to land forming part of rect. No. 215, Hadbast No. 8 of Village were to be taken into account while the land under acquisition which formed part Rect. Nos.213 & 214, Hadbast No. 8, Tehsil and District Kaithal. Learned Senior counsel also points out that since the acquisition in the present case was relating to a small chunk of land rlas for the public purpose, namely, for construction of Frozen Semen Bank at Fathpur as such even no cut was required to be applied upon the sale . Learned Senior counsel also submits that in view of latest f the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Horrmal Vs. , the same exemplar fetching highest considered while assessing the market was landowners State being satisfied with the award passed by the learned Reference Court Impugning the aforementioned Award, learned Senior for the appellants submits that the Reference Court went wrong having discarded the sale exemplars proved on record as making assessment of market value. Learned 4 & P-6, pertaining to land forming part of rect. No. 215, Hadbast No. 8 of Village were to be taken into account while part Rect. Nos.213 & 214, Hadbast No. 8, Tehsil and District Kaithal. Learned Senior counsel also points out that since the acquisition in the present case was relating to a small chunk of land rlas for the public purpose, namely, for construction of Frozen Semen Bank at Fathpur as such even no cut upon the sale . Learned Senior counsel also submits that in view of latest Horrmal Vs. , the same exemplar fetching highest considered while assessing the market SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.25 18:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-762 value of the acquired land. the reliable Court went wrong while relaying upon the Collector rate of the area assessment of market value liable to be modified. Ex.P2 to Ex.P6 is extracted hereunder: Date of Sale 1.6.1994 (Ex.P2) 1.6.1994 (Ex.P3) 1.6.1994 (Ex.P4) 6.12.1994 (Ex.P5) 11.01.1995 (Ex.P6) 7.1 was awarded for trees which were standing over the acquired land at the time of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act and thus, the appellant/ landowner was required to be suitably comp this account 8. the sale instances relied upon by the landowner in the form of Exs.P to P-6 were relating discarded by the Referen 762-1998 and anr. [4] value of the acquired land. Learned Senior counsel reliable sale exemplars were available on record, the Reference Court went wrong while relaying upon the Collector rate of the area assessment of market value and as such the impugned award was liable to be modified. Table of the sale ins Ex.P2 to Ex.P6 is extracted hereunder:- Date of Sale Area Sold Total sale proceeds 1.6.1994 (Ex.P2) 3 M Rs.61,250/- 1.6.1994 (Ex.P3) 3 M Rs.61,250/- 1.6.1994 (Ex.P4) 3 ½ M Rs.73,500/- 6.12.1994 (Ex.P5) 2 M Rs.1,32,000/- .1995 (Ex.P6) 4 M Rs.1,20,000/- Learned Senior Counsel also submits that no compensation was awarded for trees which were standing over the acquired land at the time of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act and thus, the appellant/ landowner was required to be suitably comp account also. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that all the sale instances relied upon by the landowner in the form of Exs.P were relating to 2 to 4 marlas discarded by the Reference Court for the purposes of determination of Learned Senior counsel submits that once sale exemplars were available on record, the Reference Court went wrong while relaying upon the Collector rate of the area and as such the impugned award was Table of the sale instances proved on record as - Total sale Sale price per acre Sale price per sq. yards. Rs.32,66,666/- Rs.675/ Rs.32,66,666/- Rs.675/- Rs.33,60,000/- Rs.694/- Rs.1,05,60,000/- Rs.2181/ Rs.48,00,000/- Rs.991/- Learned Senior Counsel also submits that no compensation was awarded for trees which were standing over the acquired land at the time of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act and thus, the appellant/ landowner was required to be suitably compensated on On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that all the sale instances relied upon by the landowner in the form of Exs.P to 2 to 4 marlas of land and thus were rightly ce Court for the purposes of determination of that once sale exemplars were available on record, the Reference Court went wrong while relaying upon the Collector rate of the area for and as such the impugned award was tances proved on record as Sale price per sq. Rs.675/- - - Rs.2181/- - Learned Senior Counsel also submits that no compensation was awarded for trees which were standing over the acquired land at the time of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act and thus, ensated on On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that all the sale instances relied upon by the landowner in the form of Exs.P-2 and thus were rightly ce Court for the purposes of determination of SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.25 18:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-762 market value. Learned State counsel also points out that the noted sale exemplars the same should not be relied upon for the purpose of determination of value qua land only. 8.1 award shows that the compensation towards the trees was to be determined and paid after the assessment was made by the Forest authorities. He also submits that a report dated 10.07.1996 was on record as Ex.D1 ac to the trees situated over the assessed to the tune of Rs.8084/ appellant value of the 9. through the paper behalf of the appellant. 10. learned Reference Court went wrong rate of the area for the purposes of determination of Furthermore, mere fact that the sale exemplars Exs.P relating to small piece of land; cannot be held to be a valid reason for discarding same revenue estate and proved to be genuine and 762-1998 and anr. [5] market value. Learned State counsel also points out that the sale exemplars were relating to small plots the same must have formed part of commercial area and as such d not be relied upon for the purpose of determination of value qua the present acquisition which was relating to the land only. Further, learned State Counsel submits that a perusal of the award shows that the compensation towards the trees was to be determined and paid after the assessment was made by the Forest authorities. He also submits that a report dated 10.07.1996 was on record as Ex.D1 according to which the compensation with respect to the trees situated over the subject land at the time of acquisition assessed to the tune of Rs.8084/ appellant(s)/landowner(s) were entitled for the said amount against the value of the trees. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book(s). I find substance in the submissions made on behalf of the appellant. Once the sale exemplars were available on record, the learned Reference Court went wrong rate of the area for the purposes of determination of Furthermore, mere fact that the sale exemplars Exs.P relating to small piece of land; cannot be held to be a valid reason for discarding the same especially when all those were pertaining to the same revenue estate and proved to be genuine and market value. Learned State counsel also points out that the above relating to small plots, as such reflected that formed part of commercial area and as such d not be relied upon for the purpose of determination of market which was relating to the agricultural ounsel submits that a perusal of the award shows that the compensation towards the trees was to be determined and paid after the assessment was made by the Forest authorities. He also submits that a report dated 10.07.1996 was placed cording to which the compensation with respect subject land at the time of acquisition was assessed to the tune of Rs.8084/- and at best the entitled for the said amount against the I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone book(s). I find substance in the submissions made on Once the sale exemplars were available on record, the learned Reference Court went wrong while relying upon the Collector rate of the area for the purposes of determination of market value Furthermore, mere fact that the sale exemplars Exs.P-2 to P-6 were relating to small piece of land; cannot be held to be a valid reason for same especially when all those were pertaining to the same revenue estate and proved to be genuine and bona fide above reflected that formed part of commercial area and as such market agricultural ounsel submits that a perusal of the award shows that the compensation towards the trees was to be determined and paid after the assessment was made by the Forest placed cording to which the compensation with respect was and at best the entitled for the said amount against the I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone book(s). I find substance in the submissions made on Once the sale exemplars were available on record, the while relying upon the Collector market value. 6 were relating to small piece of land; cannot be held to be a valid reason for same especially when all those were pertaining to the fide SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.25 18:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-762 transactions relates to post notification the other sale instances Exs. P period prior to the notification issued under Section 4 of the Act in the case in hand as such were required to be relied upon by the learned Reference Court especially under the circumstances record in the shape of Award No.7 dated 16.07.1996 pertaining to the present acquisition show that the land under acquisition measuring 32 kanal 18 marlas formed part of Rect. Nos. 213 sale deeds Ex.P Nos. 215 & 217, respectively, pertaining to the same Hadbast No.8 of Village Fatehpur, taking into account the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of deed dated 11.01.1995 (Ex.P learned Reference Court for the purpose of determination of value after applying development cut regard can be m hereunder: 762-1998 and anr. [6] transactions. Although Ex.P5 i.e. the sale deed dated 06.12.1996 to post notification and thus need not be relied upon, however, ther sale instances Exs. P-2 to P period prior to the notification issued under Section 4 of the Act in the case in hand as such were required to be relied upon by the learned Reference Court especially under the circumstances record in the shape of Award No.7 dated 16.07.1996 pertaining to the present acquisition as well as the site plan proved on record as Ex.P show that the land under acquisition measuring 32 kanal 18 marlas part of Rect. Nos. 213 & 214; whereas the land sale deeds Ex.P-2 to Ex.P-4 and Ex.P-6 formed part of Nos. 215 & 217, respectively, pertaining to the same Hadbast No.8 of Fatehpur, Tehsil and District Kaithal. In such circumstances and ng into account the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Horrmal’s case (supra), the highest sale exemplar i.e. sale deed dated 11.01.1995 (Ex.P-6) was required to be relied upon by the learned Reference Court for the purpose of determination of after applying development cut regard can be made to paras 28 & 29 of the same which is extracted hereunder:- “28. This view has been reiterated in State of M.P.,(2013) 16 SCC 392 bench of this Court consolidated various precedents to affirm that in circumstances where there are multiple sale deeds available for consideration, the Court shall rely on the highest valued exemplars unless the prices . Although Ex.P5 i.e. the sale deed dated 06.12.1996 need not be relied upon, however, 2 to P-4 & P-6, which relate to period prior to the notification issued under Section 4 of the Act in the case in hand as such were required to be relied upon by the learned Reference Court especially under the circumstances when a perusal of record in the shape of Award No.7 dated 16.07.1996 pertaining to the the site plan proved on record as Ex.P- show that the land under acquisition measuring 32 kanal 18 marlas & 214; whereas the land consisting of 6 formed part of the nearby Rect. Nos. 215 & 217, respectively, pertaining to the same Hadbast No.8 of Tehsil and District Kaithal. In such circumstances and ng into account the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in , the highest sale exemplar i.e. sale 6) was required to be relied upon by the learned Reference Court for the purpose of determination of market after applying development cut thereupon. Reference in this ade to paras 28 & 29 of the same which is extracted This view has been reiterated in Sh. Himmat Singh v. (2013) 16 SCC 392 where a three-judge bench of this Court consolidated various precedents to affirm that in circumstances where there are multiple sale deeds available for consideration, the Court shall rely on the highest valued exemplars unless the prices . Although Ex.P5 i.e. the sale deed dated 06.12.1996 need not be relied upon, however, relate to the period prior to the notification issued under Section 4 of the Act in the case in hand as such were required to be relied upon by the learned when a perusal of record in the shape of Award No.7 dated 16.07.1996 pertaining to the -12 show that the land under acquisition measuring 32 kanal 18 marlas consisting of Rect. Nos. 215 & 217, respectively, pertaining to the same Hadbast No.8 of Tehsil and District Kaithal. In such circumstances and ng into account the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in , the highest sale exemplar i.e. sale 6) was required to be relied upon by the market . Reference in this ade to paras 28 & 29 of the same which is extracted Sh. Himmat Singh v. judge bench of this Court consolidated various precedents to affirm that in circumstances where there are multiple sale deeds available for consideration, the Court shall rely on the highest valued exemplars unless the prices SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.25 18:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-762 11. dated 11.0 marlas; although the same has geographical and loca and proximity to the acquired land besides also having terms of time of acquisition which commenced vide notification dated 31.08.1995; it would be appropriate to apply cu development cost. The above percentage of development cut would be reasonable and appropriate in the facts and in hand wherein the land under acquisition itself is relatively a small chunk of 32 kanals 18 marlas and the purpose is for construction of 762-1998 and anr. [7] fall within a narrow range, in which case calculating an average of the values therein may be more congruous. 29. In these extenuating circumstances, there exists significant disparity among the sale exemplars presently under consideration. Amongst these sale exemplars, being Ex. P2-P8 and Ex. P10, the highest sale instance values the land at Rupees 1,81,33,867 per acre, whereas the lowest values it at Rupees 16,94,000 per acre. Given this wide range and in light of the judicial precedents cited above, we are of the opini should rely upon the highest sale exemplar, which is Ex. P5, rather than solely depending upon an average of the multiple sale deeds produced before us. Despite the Respondents’ vehement contention that Ex. P5 should not be relied upon owing to smaller parcel of land— above indicates no reason why Ex. P5 cannot be utilised to determine the amount of compensation to be awarded to the Appellants for the acquired land.” In the humble opinion of this Court, dated 11.01.1995 Ex.P6 pertains to a small plot of land measuring 4 marlas; although the same has geographical and loca and proximity to the acquired land besides also having terms of time of acquisition which commenced vide notification dated 31.08.1995; it would be appropriate to apply cu development cost. The above percentage of development cut would be reasonable and appropriate in the facts and in hand wherein the land under acquisition itself is relatively a small chunk of 32 kanals 18 marlas and the purpose is for construction of arrow range, in which case calculating an average of the values therein may be more congruous. In these extenuating circumstances, there exists significant disparity among the sale exemplars presently under consideration. Amongst these sale exemplars, P8 and Ex. P10, the highest sale instance values the land at Rupees 1,81,33,867 per acre, whereas the lowest values it at Rupees 16,94,000 per acre. Given this wide range and in light of the judicial precedents cited above, we are of the opinion that we should rely upon the highest sale exemplar, which is Ex. P5, rather than solely depending upon an average of the multiple sale deeds produced before us. Despite the Respondents’ vehement contention that Ex. P5 should not be relied upon owing to it being a significantly — the detailed analysis conducted above indicates no reason why Ex. P5 cannot be utilised to determine the amount of compensation to be awarded to the Appellants for the acquired land.” In the humble opinion of this Court, since the sale exemplar .1995 Ex.P6 pertains to a small plot of land measuring 4 marlas; although the same has geographical and locational similarity and proximity to the acquired land besides also having nearness in terms of time of acquisition which commenced vide notification dated 31.08.1995; it would be appropriate to apply cut of 45% towards development cost. The above percentage of development cut would be reasonable and appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case in hand wherein the land under acquisition itself is relatively a small chunk of 32 kanals 18 marlas and the purpose is for construction of arrow range, in which case calculating an average of the values therein may be more congruous. In these extenuating circumstances, there exists significant disparity among the sale exemplars presently under consideration. Amongst these sale exemplars, P8 and Ex. P10, the highest sale instance values the land at Rupees 1,81,33,867 per acre, whereas the lowest values it at Rupees 16,94,000 per acre. Given this wide range and in light of the judicial on that we should rely upon the highest sale exemplar, which is Ex. P5, rather than solely depending upon an average of the multiple sale deeds produced before us. Despite the Respondents’ vehement contention that Ex. P5 should it being a significantly the detailed analysis conducted above indicates no reason why Ex. P5 cannot be utilised to determine the amount of compensation to be since the sale exemplar .1995 Ex.P6 pertains to a small plot of land measuring 4 tional similarity nearness in terms of time of acquisition which commenced vide notification dated of 45% towards development cost. The above percentage of development cut would be circumstances of the case in hand wherein the land under acquisition itself is relatively a small chunk of 32 kanals 18 marlas and the purpose is for construction of SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.25 18:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-762 “Frozen Semen Bank, Fatehpur’, against which the respondents are not going to suffer much or providing of supplementary amenities. 12. value of the acquired land as on the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act thus i.e. Rs.26,38,042/ 13. over the acquired land, in the absence of any evidence appellants/ compensation to the tune of Rs.8084/ terms of report dated 10.07.1996 submitted by the Deputy Forest Range Officer, Kurukshetra and proved on record as Ex.D1. 14. by the appellant market value @ Rs.545.05 p with grant of all other statutory benefits and interest provided under the provisions of the Act; filed at the instance of State is hereby 15. disposed of. 18.08.2025 sanjay 762-1998 and anr. [8] “Frozen Semen Bank, Fatehpur’, against which the respondents are not going to suffer much towards additional infrastructural development cost or providing of supplementary amenities. In view of the discussion made hereinabove, the market value of the acquired land as on the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act thus, comes to Rs.545.05 /- i.e. Rs.26,38,042/- per acre. As regards the compensation on account of trees standing over the acquired land, in the absence of any evidence appellants/landowners, they can at best be held ent compensation to the tune of Rs.8084/ terms of report dated 10.07.1996 submitted by the Deputy Forest Range Officer, Kurukshetra and proved on record as Ex.D1. Consequently, the appeal bearing by the appellants is partly allowed in the above terms market value @ Rs.545.05 p. per sq. yards for the acquired land along with grant of all other statutory benefits and interest provided under the provisions of the Act; whereas the appeal bearing filed at the instance of State is hereby dismissed Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 18.08.2025 Whether speaking/reasoned? Whether Reportable? “Frozen Semen Bank, Fatehpur’, against which the respondents are not towards additional infrastructural development cost or providing of supplementary amenities. In view of the discussion made hereinabove, the market value of the acquired land as on the date of notification under Section 4 - per sq. yards (45% of Rs.991/ As regards the compensation on account of trees standing over the acquired land, in the absence of any evidence been led by the can at best be held entitled for award of compensation to the tune of Rs.8084/- against the value of trees in terms of report dated 10.07.1996 submitted by the Deputy Forest Range Officer, Kurukshetra and proved on record as Ex.D1. Consequently, the appeal bearing RFA No. 762-1998 filed in the above terms thereby award per sq. yards for the acquired land along with grant of all other statutory benefits and interest provided under the whereas the appeal bearing RFA No. 571-1998 dismissed. Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Yes/No “Frozen Semen Bank, Fatehpur’, against which the respondents are not towards additional infrastructural development cost In view of the discussion made hereinabove, the market value of the acquired land as on the date of notification under Section 4 (45% of Rs.991/-) As regards the compensation on account of trees standing led by the itled for award of against the value of trees in terms of report dated 10.07.1996 submitted by the Deputy Forest Range filed thereby awarding per sq. yards for the acquired land along with grant of all other statutory benefits and interest provided under the 1998 Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.25 18:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document