The Single Judge dismissed two appeals by landowners seeking enhancement of compensation for land acquired for irrigation. The court held that since the reference award was upheld in a prior judgment, no case for further enhancement was made out.
Appeals were dismissed in default as no one appeared on behalf of the appellants.
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.
RFA No. 2243 of 1993
(1)
In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
Date of decision : 22.9.2010
1. RFA No. 2243 of 1993 (O&M)
| Baldev Singh and others vs The State of Punjab and another |
..... Appellants ..... Respondents |
|
|---|---|---|
| 2. | RFA No. 2244 of 1993 (O&M) | |
| Ranjit Singh and others | ..... Appellants | |
| vs | ||
| The State of Punjab and another | ..... Respondents |
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: None for the claimants.
Mr. Yatinder Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
Rajesh Bindal J.
This order will dispose of the aforesaid appeals as the same arise out of common acquisition.
The landowners have filed the aforesaid appeals seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land.
Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 2.2.1989 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), the State of Punjab acquired land situated within the revenue estate of village Bolari, Tehsil and District Patiala, for construction of Extension of Balamgarh Minor. The Land Acquisition Collector awarded compensation of 50,000/- per acre. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the claimants filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, while relying upon its earlier award dated 8.4.1993 of village Bollar Kalan (Ex. A-8), the learned court below assessed the compensation @ 70,000/- per acre. It is this award which is impugned in the present set of appeal.
A perusal of the impugned award shows that the learned court below while assessing the compensation for the acquired land had relied upon its earlier award (Ex. P-8), pertaining to land of village Bollar Kalan vide which the market value of land acquired vide same notification for the same very purpose was assessed at ` 70,000/-.
RFA No. 2243 of 1993
(2)
It has been pointed out by the learned State counsel that the award dated 8.4.1993, Ex. A-8, was upheld by this court in RFA No. 526 of 1995 The State of Punjab and another vs Amar Singh and others , decided on 21.7.2010.
Since the award which was the basis for determination of market value in the present set of appeals has been upheld by this court in Amar Singh's case (supra), in my opinion, no case for further enhancement of compensation is made out.
However, as no one has appeared for the appellants, the appeals filed by them are dismissed in default.
22.9.2010 vs.
(Rajesh Bindal) Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether enhancement of compensation is maintainable when the award relied upon has already been upheld by this court.
Whether appeals filed in default of appearance can be disposed of by dismissal.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
The State of Punjab and another vs Amar Singh and othersRelied on¶17
RFA No. 526 of 1995 The State of Punjab and another vs Amar Singh and others decided on 21.7.2010
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Baldev Singh and others
Ranjit Singh and others
The State of Punjab
another
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
