Appellant sought enhancement of compensation for land acquired under the 1894 Act for stone crushers. The Court dismissed the appeal in default as no representative appeared and noted the market value was already upheld in a prior judgment.
The appeal was dismissed in default.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
RFA No. 1215 of 1991 (O&M)
Ramji Lal ..... Appellant vs The State of Haryana ..... Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: None for the appellant.
Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.
Rajesh Bindal J.
The landowner has filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned court below for the acquired land.
Briefly, the facts are that vide Notification dated 19.6.1987, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the State of Haryana acquired land situated in Village Pali, Hadbast no. 13, Tehsil Ballabgarh, District Faridabad, for the development and utilisation thereof for shifting of stone crushers of Faridabad-Ballabgarh Controlled area under the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, “the Collector”) determined the market value of the plain land @ ` 65,000/- per acre. The learned court below, while relying the earlier award of the same very acquisition upheld the award of the Collector. It is this award which is impugned in the present appeal.
None has appeared for the appellant.
Learned State counsel fairly submitted that the claim made by the appellant in the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgment of this court in RFA No. 708 of 1990– Krishan and others vs State of Haryana , decided on 27.9.2006, whereby the market value determined by the Collector was upheld and the appeal filed by the claimants was dismissed.
Since the court below had determined the market value of the acquired land on the basis of earlier award which has been further upheld by this court in Krishan' s case (supra), prima facie, no case for further enhancement is made out. However, as no one has appeared for the appellant, the present appeal is dismissed in default.
(Rajesh Bindal) Judge
17.8.2010 vs.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an appeal for enhancement of compensation is maintainable where the market value was already upheld by this Court in a prior decision on the same acquisition.
Whether the appeal can be allowed in default when no advocate appears for the appellant.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Krishan and others vs State of HaryanaRelied on¶11
RFA No. 708 of 1990 Krishan and others vs State of Haryana , decided on 27.9.2006
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ramji Lal
The State of Haryana
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
