Appeals challenging Land Acquisition award compensation for trees were dismissed. The court held no illegality was committed when the lower court used the accepted Dr. Nijjar formula with Wholesale Price Index adjustment.
The appeals filed by the State of Haryana and the landowners were dismissed.
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.
R.F.A. No. 3 of 2007
1
In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
R.F.A. No. 3 of 2007 (O&M)
Date of decision : 5.10.2010
State of Haryana and another
..... Appellants
vs
Hari Singh and others
..... Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: Mr. Adarsh Jain, Advocate, for the landowners.
Mr. D. D. Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.
Rajesh Bindal J.
This order will dispose of appeals bearing RFA Nos. 3, 163, 1502 of 2007 and 2484 of 2010, as the same arise out of common acquisition.
The land owners are before this Court seeking enhancement in compensation for the acquired trees existing on the acquired land whereas by filing appeals the State of Haryana is seeking reduction thereof.
The facts have been extracted from RFA No. 3 of 2007.
Briefly, the facts of the case are that vide notification dated 10.12.1992 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “the Act”), the State of Haryana acquired land situated in revenue estate of Palwal, Hadbast No. 73, District Faridabad, along with fruit/non-fruit bearing trees and superstructures for public purpose. The Land Acquisition Collector assessed compensation for the fruit bearing trees standing on the acquired land vide award dated 25.9.1997. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below vide award dated 28.4.2006, assessed the compensation for the fruit bearing trees as per Dr. Nijjar's formula. It is this award which is impugned before this court.
A perusal of the impugned award shows that the learned court below had granted compensation to the landowners on account of acquisition of trees by assessing the value thereof as per Dr. Nijjar's formula, which is judicially accepted. Further increase thereon in terms of difference in wholesale price index from 1985 to 1992, had also been awarded. Learned counsels for the parties have not been able to point out as to what illegality has been committed by the learned court
R.F.A. No. 3 of 2007
2
below in assessing the value of fruit bearing trees in terms of the settled proposition of law.
Accordingly, I do not find any merit in the appeals and the same are
dismissed.
5.10.2010 vs.
(Rajesh Bindal) Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appellate court must find an illegality when compensation for fruit-bearing trees was assessed using the accepted Dr. Nijjar formula.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
State of Haryana and another
Hari Singh and others
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
