Allowed

Mata Din and Nathu Ram v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC19 Aug 2010RFA/1448/1992

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Landowners appealed against an award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The court enhanced compensation following the precedent established in Devi Singh's case, dismissing objections to Collector's original valuation.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was disposed of in the same terms as Devi Singh's case, effectively enhancing the compensation awarded under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

Mata Din and Nathu Ram Vs State of Haryana — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh

¶2

R. F. A No. 1448 of 1992 (O&M)

Matadin and another

The Haryana State

..... Appellants ..... Respondent

¶7

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal

¶8

Present: Mr. C. B. Goel, Advocate, for the appellants.

¶9

Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.

¶10

Rajesh Bindal J.

¶11

The landowners are in appeal before this court against the award of the learned court below passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land.

¶12

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the State of Haryana vide notification dated 14.9.1983 issued under Section 4 of the Act, acquired land situated within the revenue estate of Village Kadipur, Tehsil and District Gurgaon, for public purpose namely for the development and utilisation of land as residential area in Gurgaon. The Land Acquisition Collector assessed the market value of the land @ 45,000/- per acre for chahi and 16,000/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below determined the market value of the acquired land @ ` 19.81 paise per square. It is this award which is impugned in the present appeal.

¶13

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the issue raised in the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgment of this court in R. F. A. No. 795 of 1990 Devi Singh (deceased) through LR's Bishamber and others vs The Land Acquisition Collector and another decided on 22.9.2008, wherein this court has enhanced the compensation payable to the landowners to ` 33/- per square yard.

¶14

Learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, did not dispute this factual position.

¶15

For the detailed reasons recorded in Devi Singh's case (supra), the present appeal is disposed of in the same terms.

¶16

19.8.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge

Mata Din and Nathu Ram v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mata Din and Nathu Ram v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Savitri Devi Vs State of Haryana

Surinder Singh Vs Parminder Singh

(O&M)Tara Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab

State of Haryana Vs Gurudawara Manji Sahib

Jaspal Singh Vs State of Punjab

(O&M) Labh Singh Vs State of Punjab