RFA-6957-2013 263 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Vinod Kumar State of Punjab and CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr. H.K. Aurora, Advocate, Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Gurmeet Singh, Advocate, for the appellant(s) X-o Mr. for respondent No.1 (in RFA Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Addl.A.G., Punjab. HARKESH MAN 1. A batch of 4 whereof are given on the foot of the judgment of by this common order, as they involve 2013 along with other connected cases 263 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA-6957-2013 and connected cases Decided on:-25.07.2025 vs. State of Punjab and others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr. H.K. Aurora, Advocate, . Sandeep Bansal, Advocate . Hemant Sarin, Advocate, . R.K. Chauhan, Advocate . S.K. Kanojia, Advocate Mr. Gurmeet Singh, Advocate, for the appellant(s)/landowners/ objectors/respondent(s). Mr. Bhanu Partap Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.1 (in RFA-10437-2014). Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Addl.A.G., Punjab. ***** HARKESH MANUJA J. (Oral) batch of 43 connected Regular First Appeals whereof are given on the foot of the judgment of by this common order, as they involve --1-- 263 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT 2013 and connected cases 25.07.2025 ….Appellant. ….Respondents. HARKESH MANUJA Bhanu Partap Singh, Advocate, Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Addl.A.G., Punjab. connected Regular First Appeals (details whereof are given on the foot of the judgment) shall stand disposed of by this common order, as they involve common question of law SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.02 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-6957-2013 and facts. 1.1 For convenience, the facts are being taken from 6957-2013. 2. Brief facts of the case are that certain land owned by the appellants-landowners, situated in the revenue estate of village Bajwara, Tehsil and District Hoshiarpur, came to be acquired vide notifications dated 07.01.2005 and 04.05.2005, issued under Sections 4 and 6, respectively, of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “1894 Act”), for the construction of Kandi Canal. Total land under acquisition was 1 16.11.2007, the Land Acquisition Collector, the following terms besides granting other statutory benefits, interest etc:- 3. Aggrieved of the award passed by the Land Acquisition Collector, appellant(s) under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, seeking enhancement of compensation. record, the Reference Court vide its award dated 01.05.2013, 2013 along with other connected cases For convenience, the facts are being taken from Brief facts of the case are that certain land owned by the landowners, situated in the revenue estate of village Bajwara, Tehsil and District Hoshiarpur, came to be acquired vide notifications dated 07.01.2005 and 04.05.2005, issued under Sections 4 and 6, respectively, of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “1894 Act”), for the construction of Kandi Canal. Total land under acquisition was 18.13 Acres. Vide 16.11.2007, the Land Acquisition Collector, the following terms besides granting other statutory benefits, interest “Chahi Rs.2718.75 paisa per marla Barani @ Rs.1812.50 paisa per marl Banjar Qudim @ Rs.1250/ Gair Mumkin Choe @ Rs.1250/ Bag Chahi @ Rs.2250/ Gair Mumkin Rasta @ Rs.1250/ Gair Mumkin Abadi @ Rs.20,000/ Gair Mumkin Tubewell @ Rs.20,000/ marla Gair Mumkin Chahi @ Rs.1250/ Jhangi Drakhtan @ Rs.1812.50 paisa per marla” Aggrieved of the award passed by the Land Acquisition Collector, appellant(s)-landowners invoked reference petition(s) under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, seeking enhancement of compensation. Upon consideration of the material available on record, the Reference Court vide its award dated 01.05.2013, --2-- For convenience, the facts are being taken from RFA- Brief facts of the case are that certain land owned by the landowners, situated in the revenue estate of village Bajwara, Tehsil and District Hoshiarpur, came to be acquired vide notifications dated 07.01.2005 and 04.05.2005, issued under Sections 4 and 6, respectively, of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “1894 Act”), for the construction of Kandi Canal. Total land Acres. Vide Award No.26 dated 16.11.2007, the Land Acquisition Collector, assessed market value in the following terms besides granting other statutory benefits, interest Rs.2718.75 paisa per marla @ Rs.1812.50 paisa per marla @ Rs.1250/- per marla @ Rs.1250/- per marla @ Rs.2250/- per marla @ Rs.1250/- per marla @ Rs.20,000/- per marla @ Rs.20,000/- (2 marlas area) per @ Rs.1250/- per marla @ Rs.1812.50 paisa per marla” Aggrieved of the award passed by the Land Acquisition landowners invoked reference petition(s) under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, seeking enhancement of sideration of the material available on record, the Reference Court vide its award dated 01.05.2013, SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.02 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-6957-2013 assessed the addition, the appellants were also awarded severance charges @ 25% of the market value hereunder:- that acquired land of the applicants is chahi in nature and respondents have rightly considered the land of applicants as chahi in nature at the time of the compensation awarded to the applicants by the government for their acquired land at the rate of Rs.2718/ per marla is much less than the market value of the acquired land. The claimants have produced sufficient evidence on file to prove that they have been given less compensation than the prevalent market value of the acquired land therefore they are entitled to enhancement of compensation. As such, it is held that claimants are entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs instead of Rs.2718/ them by the respondents. @ 25% of the un which the applicants have purchased the acquired land comprised in khasra Numbers 29//19/2, 20/3, 21/3, 22, 28, 39//5/3/2 and 40R/1 which remains unapproachable on both the sides of the Canal. Apart from it, applicants are entitled to solatium at the rate of acquired land in accordance with Section 23 (2) of the Act. The petitioners are also entitled to appreciation charges u/s 23(1) (a) of the Act at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of issuance of notification under Sect the date of taking possession or announcement of award whichever is earlier. As such, issue No.3 stands decided in favour of the applicants and against respondents. 2013 along with other connected cases assessed the uniform market value @ Rs.9000/ addition, the appellants were also awarded severance charges @ 25% of the market value. The relevant part thereof is extracted “From the perusal of evidence on the file it is clear that acquired land of the applicants is chahi in nature and respondents have rightly considered the land of applicants as chahi in nature at the time of passing the award, however, the compensation awarded to the applicants by the government for their acquired land at the rate of Rs.2718/ per marla is much less than the market value of the acquired land. The claimants have produced sufficient evidence on file to prove that they have been given less compensation than the prevalent market value of the acquired land therefore they are entitled to enhancement of compensation. As such, it is held that claimants are entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs.9000/- (Rs.Nine thousand only) per marla instead of Rs.2718/- per marla which has been awarded to them by the respondents. XX XX XX The applicants are also entitled to severance charges @ 25% of the un-acquired land i.e. 27 kanals 11 marlas from ich the applicants have purchased the acquired land comprised in khasra Numbers 29//19/2, 20/3, 21/3, 22, 28, 39//5/3/2 and 40R/1 which remains unapproachable on both the sides of the Canal. Apart from it, applicants are entitled to solatium at the rate of 30% on the market value of the acquired land in accordance with Section 23 (2) of the Act. The petitioners are also entitled to appreciation charges u/s 23(1) (a) of the Act at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of issuance of notification under Sect the date of taking possession or announcement of award whichever is earlier. As such, issue No.3 stands decided in favour of the applicants and against respondents. --3-- market value @ Rs.9000/- per marla. In addition, the appellants were also awarded severance charges @ relevant part thereof is extracted “From the perusal of evidence on the file it is clear that acquired land of the applicants is chahi in nature and respondents have rightly considered the land of applicants as passing the award, however, the compensation awarded to the applicants by the government for their acquired land at the rate of Rs.2718/- per marla is much less than the market value of the acquired land. The claimants have produced sufficient evidence on the file to prove that they have been given less compensation than the prevalent market value of the acquired land therefore they are entitled to enhancement of compensation. As such, it is held that claimants are entitled to compensation (Rs.Nine thousand only) per marla per marla which has been awarded to XX The applicants are also entitled to severance charges acquired land i.e. 27 kanals 11 marlas from ich the applicants have purchased the acquired land comprised in khasra Numbers 29//19/2, 20/3, 21/3, 22, 28, 39//5/3/2 and 40R/1 which remains unapproachable on both the sides of the Canal. Apart from it, applicants are entitled to 30% on the market value of the acquired land in accordance with Section 23 (2) of the Act. The petitioners are also entitled to appreciation charges u/s 23(1) (a) of the Act at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act till the date of taking possession or announcement of award whichever is earlier. As such, issue No.3 stands decided in favour of the applicants and against respondents. SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.02 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-6957-2013 of 9% per annum on the enhanced amount for the first year from the date of taking possession of acquired land and thereafter future interest at the rate of 15% per annum till the realization of entire amount of enhanced compensation. The amount paid b 4. Feeling aggrieved Reference Court, the appellant(s) preferred whereof are mentioned in the foot of the judgment 5. Learned counsel for the appellan submits that the Reference Court failed to take into account the sale deeds Ex. A7 to Ex.A11, which were produced on record evidence. He also submits that since the sale deeds Exs.A were relating to 2000 whereas present acquisition an appreciation @12% per annum maximum consideration, the market value should have been reliance, learned counsel proved on record as Exs. A appreciation of 12% per annum fro deeds upto the date of notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act relating to the present acquisition. Exhibit Sale deed No. A-7 5276 21.12.2000 2013 along with other connected cases XX XX The petitioners are also entitled to interest at the of 9% per annum on the enhanced amount for the first year from the date of taking possession of acquired land and thereafter future interest at the rate of 15% per annum till the realization of entire amount of enhanced compensation. The amount paid by Collector may be adjusted. Feeling aggrieved of the aforesaid award passed by the Reference Court, the appellant(s) preferred whereof are mentioned in the foot of the judgment Learned counsel for the appellan submits that the Reference Court failed to take into account the sale deeds Ex. A7 to Ex.A11, which were produced on record evidence. He also submits that since the sale deeds Exs.A were relating to the period between November 1999 to December whereas notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act in the acquisition was issued on 07.01.2005/14.01.2005 appreciation @12% per annum of the sale deed fetching maximum consideration, was required to be the market value should have been assessed learned counsel has submitted a chart of the sale deeds proved on record as Exs. A-7 to A-11 after having applied appreciation of 12% per annum from the date of the date of notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act relating to the present acquisition. The same is extracted hereunder: Date of Sale deed Village Area of land 21.12.2000 Bajwara 907 sq. --4-- XX XX The petitioners are also entitled to interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the enhanced amount for the first year from the date of taking possession of acquired land and thereafter future interest at the rate of 15% per annum till the realization of entire amount of enhanced compensation. The y Collector may be adjusted.” the aforesaid award passed by the Reference Court, the appellant(s) preferred separate appeals (details whereof are mentioned in the foot of the judgment). Learned counsel for the appellant(s), Mr. H.K. Aurora submits that the Reference Court failed to take into account the sale deeds Ex. A7 to Ex.A11, which were produced on record as material evidence. He also submits that since the sale deeds Exs.A-7 to A11 November 1999 to December notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act in the was issued on 07.01.2005/14.01.2005, as such of the sale deed fetching d to be applied and thereafter, assessed. For the purpose of has submitted a chart of the sale deeds 11 after having applied the m the date of respective sale the date of notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act The same is extracted hereunder:- Area of Price Per marla 907 sq. Rs.100000/- Rs.30021/- SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.02 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-6957-2013 A-8 3234 22.08.2000 A-9 5277 21.12.2000 A-10 5823 31.01.2000 A-11 4462 22.11.1999 5.1. Learned counsel thus, submits that in view of the evidence available on record in the shape of sale deeds (Ex. A7 to Ex.A11), which pertain to the same revenue estate of Village Bajwara, Tehsil and District Hoshiarpur, acquisition was required to be assessed at the rate of Rs. marla along with all statutory benefits and interest unde Act, besides grant of severance charges. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent assessed by the Reference Court at the rate of Rs.9000/ for chahi land and Rs.8200/ account the evidence available on record. He also submits that no appreciation at all was required to be applied over and above the sale consideration mentioned in Ex.A7 to Ex.A11 and were required to be discarded being related to small parcels of land. Learned State counsel thus submits that called for no interference. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book. I find behalf of the appellant(s) 2013 along with other connected cases feet 22.08.2000 Bajwara 2394 sq. feet 21.12.2000 Bajwara 952 sq. feet 31.01.2000 Bajwara 2280 sq. feet 22.11.1999 Bajwara 2100 sq. feet Learned counsel thus, submits that in view of the evidence available on record in the shape of sale deeds (Ex. A7 to Ex.A11), which pertain to the same revenue estate of Village Bajwara, Tehsil and District Hoshiarpur, the market value of the land under acquisition was required to be assessed at the rate of Rs. marla along with all statutory benefits and interest unde Act, besides grant of severance charges. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State submits that the market value was assessed by the Reference Court at the rate of Rs.9000/ d and Rs.8200/- per marla for barani account the evidence available on record. He also submits that no appreciation at all was required to be applied over and above the sale consideration mentioned in Ex.A7 to Ex.A11 and were required to be discarded being related to small parcels of land. Learned State counsel thus submits that the award under challenge called for no interference. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book. I find substance in the submissions made on behalf of the appellant(s)/ landowners. --5-- Rs.177000/- Rs.20130/- 952 sq. Rs.105000/- Rs.30034/- Rs.168000/- Rs.20062/- Rs.116000/- Rs.15040/- Learned counsel thus, submits that in view of the evidence available on record in the shape of sale deeds (Ex. A7 to Ex.A11), which pertain to the same revenue estate of Village Bajwara, Tehsil the market value of the land under acquisition was required to be assessed at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per marla along with all statutory benefits and interest under the 1894 On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf State submits that the market value was rightly assessed by the Reference Court at the rate of Rs.9000/- per marla barani land after taking into account the evidence available on record. He also submits that no appreciation at all was required to be applied over and above the sale consideration mentioned in Ex.A7 to Ex.A11 and rather the same were required to be discarded being related to small parcels of land. the award under challenge I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone substance in the submissions made on SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.02 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-6957-2013 8. As a matter of fact the present appeal relates to the acquisition of land falling within the revenue estate of Village Bajwara, Tehsil and District Hoshiarpur and the sale dee even pertain to the same revenue estate evidence available on record to doubt the deeds, the same need to be relied upon for the purpose of determination of market value of the land under acquisition, being bonafide transactions. 8.1 Further, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Maharashtra, 25 INSC 900, considered and para hereunder:- Accordingly, applying the aforesaid principle of law, in the given facts and circumstances, the sale deed Ex.A9 dated 21.12.2000 being the highest of the ex upon. From the chart extracted in the preceding par it can be traced out that the sale consideration per marla pertaining to the sale deed Ex.A 8.2 Equally important, a perusal of the 2013 along with other connected cases As a matter of fact the present appeal relates to the acquisition of land falling within the revenue estate of Village Bajwara, Tehsil and District Hoshiarpur and the sale dee pertain to the same revenue estate and further evidence available on record to doubt the genuineness deeds, the same need to be relied upon for the purpose of determination of market value of the land under acquisition, being transactions. Further, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Manohar and othe Maharashtra, 25 INSC 900, the highest of the and para 33 thereof being relevant, “33. It can thus be seen that it is a settled position of law that when there are several exemplars reference to similar land, usually the highest of the exemplars, which is a bona will be considered. The same was reiterated in the judgment of this Court in the case of Mohammad Yusuf (supra). Accordingly, applying the aforesaid principle of law, in the given facts and circumstances, the sale deed Ex.A9 dated being the highest of the exemplars From the chart extracted in the preceding par can be traced out that the sale consideration per marla pertaining to the sale deed Ex.A-9 comes to Rs.30034/-. Equally important, a perusal of the --6-- As a matter of fact the present appeal relates to the acquisition of land falling within the revenue estate of Village Bajwara, Tehsil and District Hoshiarpur and the sale deeds Exs. A-7 to A-11 and further there being no genuineness of these sale deeds, the same need to be relied upon for the purpose of determination of market value of the land under acquisition, being the Further, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Manohar and others. Vs. State of the highest of the exemplar needs to be thereof being relevant, is extracted It can thus be seen that it is a settled position of law that when there are several exemplars with reference to similar land, usually the highest of the exemplars, which is a bona-fide transaction, will be considered. The same was reiterated in the judgment of this Court in the case of Mohammad Yusuf (supra).” Accordingly, applying the aforesaid principle of law, in the given facts and circumstances, the sale deed Ex.A9 dated mplars needs to be relied From the chart extracted in the preceding part of the judgment, can be traced out that the sale consideration per marla pertaining to Equally important, a perusal of the aforementioned chart SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.02 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-6957-2013 clearly reflects that there has been an apparent upward trend in the price of land in Village Bajwara Ex.A-11 dated 22.11.1999, the sale consideration per marla Rs.15040/-; whereas with respect to the sale deeds Exs.A pertaining to 21.12.2000, the sale price increased to Rs.30000/ marla which itself shows an increase of around 100% towards the sale price of land in Village Bajwara, District Hoshi period of one year. Further, Tapase Vs. Maharashtra Industrial Development others, reported as (2022) 7 SCC 563 increase per year exemplars for the period between the sale exemplar and the date of notification under Section 4 of the relevant acqu granted. Para hereunder:- “27. 28. 2013 along with other connected cases clearly reflects that there has been an apparent upward trend in the in Village Bajwara District Hoshiarpur 11 dated 22.11.1999, the sale consideration per marla ; whereas with respect to the sale deeds Exs.A pertaining to 21.12.2000, the sale price increased to Rs.30000/ marla which itself shows an increase of around 100% towards the of land in Village Bajwara, District Hoshi period of one year. Further, the Hon’ble Apex Court in Tapase Vs. Maharashtra Industrial Development others, reported as (2022) 7 SCC 563 increase per year upon the consideration mentioned in the sale exemplars for the period between the sale exemplar and the date of notification under Section 4 of the relevant acqu Paras 27 & 28 thereof being relevant 27. Looking to the fact that the sale deed produced at Ext. 41 with respect to the land bearing Survey No. 20/2 was with respect to the very Village Bhoyar which was the only sale exemplar of the same village and other sale exemplars/sale deeds were with respect to another Village Lohara and also with respect to small pieces of land, we are of the considered view that the High Court has rightly relied upon and considered the sale exemplar at Ext. 41 while determining the compensation in the present cases with respect to the lands of the very Village Bhoyar. However, at the same time, bearing in mind the --7-- clearly reflects that there has been an apparent upward trend in the District Hoshiarpur. As per sale deed 11 dated 22.11.1999, the sale consideration per marla was ; whereas with respect to the sale deeds Exs.A-7 to A-9 pertaining to 21.12.2000, the sale price increased to Rs.30000/- per marla which itself shows an increase of around 100% towards the of land in Village Bajwara, District Hoshiarpur, within a the Hon’ble Apex Court in Ramrao Shankar Tapase Vs. Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation and others, reported as (2022) 7 SCC 563, held that a cumulative upon the consideration mentioned in the sale exemplars for the period between the sale exemplar and the date of notification under Section 4 of the relevant acquisition needs to be thereof being relevant are extracted Looking to the fact that the sale deed produced at Ext. 41 with respect to the land bearing Survey No. 20/2 was with respect to the very Village Bhoyar was the only sale exemplar of the same village and other sale exemplars/sale deeds were with respect to another Village Lohara and also with respect to small pieces of land, we are of the considered view that the High Court has rightly idered the sale exemplar at Ext. 41 while determining the compensation in the present cases with respect to the lands of the very However, at the same time, bearing in mind the SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.02 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-6957-2013 Keeping in view the aforesaid and also applying the ratio of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Shankar Tapa applied over the sale consideration for the period between the date of sale deed i.e. 21.12.2000 till the date of notification under Section 4 of the present acquisition proceedings i.e. 07.01.2005 in this regard is extracted hereunder: 21.12.2000 12% increase 21.12.2001 12% increase 21.12.2002 12% increase 21.12.2003 12% increase 21.12.2004 8.3. Moreover, f been established that the land under acquisition is abutting the Panjab University Campus, Hoshiarpur and is located within the 2013 along with other connected cases decision of this Court in Pehlad Ram, by which this Court has observed and held that a cumulative increase of 10 to 15% per year in the market value of the land may be accepted, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that instead of 10% cumulative increase as adopted by the High Court, increase would have been adopted, it would have been just and proper and in the fitness of things.” Keeping in view the aforesaid and also applying the ratio of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Shankar Tapase (supra), 12% appreciation per year needs to be applied over the sale consideration mentioned in the sale deed Ex. for the period between the date of sale deed i.e. 21.12.2000 till the date of notification under Section 4 of the present acquisition proceedings i.e. 07.01.2005 in this regard is extracted hereunder:- 21.12.2000 12% increase Total Rs.30,034/ Rs. 3,604/ Rs.33,638/ 21.12.2001 12% increase Total Rs.33,638/ Rs. 4,037/ Rs.37,675/ 21.12.2002 12% increase Total Rs.37,675/ Rs. 4,521/ Rs.42,196/ 21.12.2003 12% increase Total Rs.42,196/ Rs. 5,064/ Rs.47,260/ 21.12.2004 Rs.47,260/ Moreover, from the evidence available on record, it has been established that the land under acquisition is abutting the Panjab University Campus, Hoshiarpur and is located within the --8-- decision of this Court in Pehlad Ram, by which this has observed and held that a cumulative increase of 10 to 15% per year in the market value of the land may be accepted, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that instead of 10% cumulative increase as adopted by the High Court, if 12% cumulative increase would have been adopted, it would have been just and proper and in the fitness of things.” Keeping in view the aforesaid and also applying the ratio of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ramrao , 12% appreciation per year needs to be mentioned in the sale deed Ex.A9 for the period between the date of sale deed i.e. 21.12.2000 till the date of notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act relating to the present acquisition proceedings i.e. 07.01.2005 and a detailed chart Rs.30,034/- 3,604/- Rs.33,638/- Rs.33,638/- 4,037/- Rs.37,675/- Rs.37,675/- 4,521/- Rs.42,196/- Rs.42,196/- 5,064/- Rs.47,260/- Rs.47,260/- rom the evidence available on record, it has been established that the land under acquisition is abutting the Panjab University Campus, Hoshiarpur and is located within the SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.02 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-6957-2013 radius of 5 kms of the Municipal Limits of Hoshiarpur City, thus considering its to apply development cut at the rate of Rs.47260/- as assessed the market value of the acquired land on the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act comes to Rs. rounded off). 9. In view of the aforesaid, the award dated 01.05.2013 passed by learned Additional District Judge, H the extent that the appellants/ landowners shall be entitled for award of market value @ Rs. benefits/ interest. to the grant of as awarded in favour of the appellants/ landowners by the learned Reference Court, thus the same is ordered to be maintained as such. 10. Consequently, the appeals as well as cross filed by the appellants/ landowners are partly allowed; whereas the appeals and cross dismissed. 11. Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 25.07.2025 sonika Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: 2013 along with other connected cases radius of 5 kms of the Municipal Limits of Hoshiarpur City, thus its locational and potential value, it would be appropriate to apply development cut at the rate of as assessed regarding the sale exemplar i.e. Ex.A9; the market value of the acquired land on the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act comes to Rs.28356 In view of the aforesaid, the award dated 01.05.2013 passed by learned Additional District Judge, H the extent that the appellants/ landowners shall be entitled for award of market value @ Rs.28000/- per marla along with all other statutory benefits/ interest. Besides it, no interference the grant of 25% of the market value towards severance charges as awarded in favour of the appellants/ landowners by the learned Reference Court, thus the same is ordered to be maintained as such. Consequently, the appeals as well as cross appellants/ landowners are partly allowed; whereas the and cross-objections filed at the instance of State are hereby Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: --9-- radius of 5 kms of the Municipal Limits of Hoshiarpur City, thus locational and potential value, it would be appropriate to apply development cut at the rate of 40% over the amount of regarding the sale exemplar i.e. Ex.A9; thus the market value of the acquired land on the date of notification under 28356/- per marla(Rs.28000/- In view of the aforesaid, the award dated 01.05.2013 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur is modified to the extent that the appellants/ landowners shall be entitled for award along with all other statutory interference is called for with regard 25% of the market value towards severance charges as awarded in favour of the appellants/ landowners by the learned Reference Court, thus the same is ordered to be maintained as such. Consequently, the appeals as well as cross-objections appellants/ landowners are partly allowed; whereas the at the instance of State are hereby Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/ No SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.02 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-6957-2013 Sr. No. Case No. 1. RFA-9292 2 RFA-10437 3 RFA-10604 4 RFA-10605 5. RFA-10606 6. RFA-10677 7. RFA-5091 with X-OBJR 8. RFA-5094 with XOBJR 9. RFA-5097 WITH XOBJR- 10. RFA-9293 11. RFA-9294 with X-OBJR 12 RFA-9295 with X-OBJR 13 RFA-9296 with X-OBJR 14 RFA-9297 15. RFA-6756 WITH XOBJR 16. RFA-331 17. RFA-4363 2013 along with other connected cases Case No. Title 9292-2014 (O&M) STATE OF PUNJAB TH COLLECTOR HOSHIARPUR AND ORS V/S CHARANJIT SINGH 10437-2014 (O&M) STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS VS.RAJ KUMAR AND ORS. 10604-2014(O&M) DINESH AND ORS V/S STATE PUNJAB AND ANR 10605-2014 (O&M) SITA RAM V/S STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR 10606-2014 (O&M) CHARANJIT SINGH AND ORS V/S STATE OF PUNJAB 10677-2014(O&M) KRISHAN KUMAR AND ORS. VS. STATE OF PUNJAB 5091-2014(O&M) OBJR-259-CI-2016 STATE OFPUNJAB AND ANR. VS.HARISH MOHAN 5094-2014(O&M) XOBJR-261-CI-2016 STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS. LACHHMAN DASS 5097-2014 (O&M) 33-CI-2015 STATE OF JASPREET SINGH 9293-2014(O&M) STATE OF COLLECTOR HOSHIARPUR AND ORS. VS. SITA RAM 9294-2014 (O&M) OBJR-260-CI-2016 STATE OF PUNJAB THR. COLLECTOR H ORS. VS. 9295-2014(O&M) OBJR-268-CI-2016 STATE OF PUNJAB COLLECTOR HOSHIARPUR AND ORS. VS. GURSHARAN SINGH 9296-2014(O&M) OBJR-262-CI-2016 STATE OF PUNJAB TH COLLECTOR HOSHIARPUR AND ORS. VS. KAMLA DEVI 9297-2014 (O&M) STATE OF PUNJAB TH COLLECTOR HOSHIARPUR AND ORS VS. DINESH 6756-2014 (O&M) XOBJR-61-CI-2016 STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS. PARAMJIT 331-2017(O&M) CHANAN KAUR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR 4363-2013 (O&M) SATVIR SINGH PARMAR AND ORS. VS STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR --10-- STATE OF PUNJAB THROUGH COLLECTOR HOSHIARPUR AND ORS V/S CHARANJIT SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS VS.RAJ KUMAR AND ORS. DINESH AND ORS V/S STATE OF AND ANR SITA RAM V/S STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR CHARANJIT SINGH AND ORS V/S STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR KRISHAN KUMAR AND ORS. VS. STATE OF PUNJAB STATE OFPUNJAB AND ANR. VS.HARISH MOHAN STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS. LACHHMAN DASS STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS. JASPREET SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB THR. COLLECTOR HOSHIARPUR AND ORS. VS. SITA RAM STATE OF PUNJAB THR. COLLECTOR HOSHIARPUR AND ORS. VS. GIAN CHAND STATE OF PUNJAB THR COLLECTOR HOSHIARPUR AND ORS. VS. GURSHARAN SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB THR COLLECTOR HOSHIARPUR AND ORS. VS. KAMLA DEVI STATE OF PUNJAB THR COLLECTOR HOSHIARPUR AND ORS VS. DINESH STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS. PARAMJIT SINGH. CHANAN KAUR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. SATVIR SINGH PARMAR AND ORS. VS STATE OF PUNJAB AND SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.02 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-6957-2013 18. RFA-4551 19. RFA-4552 with XOBJR 20. RFA-4553 21. RFA-4977 22. RFA-5067 23 RFA-5068 24. RFA-5069 25. RFA-5070 26. RFA-5071 27. RFA-5072 28. RFA-5085 29. RFA-5092 with X-OBJR 30. RFA-5095 31 RFA-5098 32 RFA-6413 33. RFA-677 34 RFA-6958 35 RFA-6959 36. RFA-6960 37. RFA-6961 38. RFA-6962 2013 along with other connected cases 4551-2014(O&M) STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS RAMJI DASS AND ORS 4552-2014 (O&M) XOBJR-258-CI-2016 STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS. LEELA DEVI 4553-2014 (O&M) STATE OF RAMJI DASS AND ORS 4977-2014(O&M) GURDEV SINGH ETC. VS. STATE OF PUNJAB ETC. 5067-2014(O&M) STATE OF PUNJAB THR. COLLECTOR HOSHIARPUR AND ORS. VS. VINOD KUMAR 5068-2014 (O&M) STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. VS. TANIT PAL 5069-2014 (O&M) STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. VS. PARAMJIT KAUR 5070-2014 (O&M) STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS VS. OM PARKASH 5071-2014(O&M) STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. VS. BHAGWATI DEVI 5072-2014(O&M) STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. VS, KULWINDER KAUR AND ORS. 5085-2013(O&M) RAMMURTI VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. 5092-2014(O&M) OBJR-256-CI-2016 STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS. JAGAT PARKASH AND ORS. 5095-2014 (O&M) STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS. TILAK RAJ 5098-2014(O&M) STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS. RAMMURTI 6413-2014 (O&M) STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. VS. GURDEV SINGH 677-2014 (O&M) RAMJI DASS & ORS. VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. 6958-2013 (O&M) BHAGWATI DEVI VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND 6959-2013 TANIT PAL VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. 6960-2013 (O&M) KULWINDER KAUR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. 6961-2013 (O&M) PARAMJIT KAUR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. 6962-2013 (O&M) OM PARKASH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. --11-- STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS RAMJI DASS AND ORS STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS. LEELA DEVI STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS. RAMJI DASS AND ORS GURDEV SINGH ETC. VS. STATE OF PUNJAB ETC. STATE OF PUNJAB THR. COLLECTOR HOSHIARPUR AND ORS. VS. VINOD KUMAR STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. VS. PAL STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. VS. PARAMJIT KAUR STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS VS. OM PARKASH STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. VS. BHAGWATI DEVI STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. VS, KULWINDER KAUR AND ORS. RAMMURTI VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS. JAGAT PARKASH AND ORS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS. TILAK RAJ STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS. RAMMURTI STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. VS. GURDEV SINGH RAMJI DASS & ORS. VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. BHAGWATI DEVI VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. TANIT PAL VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. KULWINDER KAUR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. PARAMJIT KAUR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. OM PARKASH VS. STATE OF AND ORS. SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.02 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-6957-2013 39. RFA-8641 40. RFA-962 41 RFA-9678 with X-OBJR 42 RFA-5093 2013 along with other connected cases 8641-2014 (O&M) MANJIT SINGH AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER 962-2014 (O&M) RAMJI DASS AND ORS. VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. 9678-2014 (O&M) OBJR-257-CI-2016 STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS. SUKHDEV SINGH 5093-2014 (O&M) STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS. KRISHAN KUMAR AND ORS. --12-- MANJIT SINGH AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER RAMJI DASS AND ORS. VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. TE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS. SUKHDEV SINGH AND ORS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. VS. KRISHAN KUMAR AND ORS. SANJAY GUPTA 2025.08.02 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document