In an appeal challenging the reduction of acquisition compensation, the High Court declined to examine the legal submissions on Section 23(1A) due to the case's age and trivial value, dismissing the appeal without addressing the legal issue.
The appeal was dismissed without touching the legal issues raised.
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. 1255 of 1992 (O&M)
State of Haryana ... Appellant vs Mohan Lal and others ..... Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.
Rajesh Bindal J.
The State is in appeal before this Court against the award passed by learned court below seeking reduction in the amount of compensation awarded to the landowner on account of acquisition of land.
Briefly, the facts are that State of Haryana vide notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “the Act”) acquired land situated in the revenue estate of Village Gaunchi, Tehsil Ballabgarh, District Faridabad for development and utilisation thereof as Storm Water Drain in Sectors 24 and 25 Faridabad. The Land Acquisition Collector vide his award dated 7.4.1979 determined the market value of the acquired land @ 60/- per marla. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections which were referred to the learned Court below for consideration, who keeping in view the material placed on record by the parties, determined the market value of the acquired land @ 432/- per marla. It is this award which is challenged in the present appeal.
Learned counsel for the State submitted that the benefits granted by the learned court below under Section 23 (1A) of the Act are only admissible in those cases where the award of the Collector was announced on or after 30.4.1982 and in the present case the Collector announced his award on 7.4.1979, therefore, the award to that extent be set aside.
A perusal of the paper-book shows that issue sought to be raised in the present appeal is regarding a meager amount. The acquisition in the present case was of a small piece of land. The acquisition having taken place more than 31 years back. Considering the aforesaid facts, I do not deem it appropriate to go into the submissions made by the learned State counsel at this stage.
Accordingly, while not touching the legal issue, the present appeal is dismissed.
( Rajesh Bindal) Judge
2.8.2010 vs.
State of Haryana
Mohan Lal
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
