The State appealed to reduce compensation awarded by the Reference Court for land acquired for a highway project. The single-judge bench dismissed the appeal, holding that the matter was covered by a prior judgment of this court.
The appeal filed by the State for reduction of compensation was 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.
In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
R. F. A. No. 2769 of 2008 (O&M)
State of Haryana And Another .... Appellants vs Rattna And Others ..... Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: Mr. H. S. Hooda, Advocate General, Haryana with Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.
Rajesh Bindal J.
Through the present appeal the State has approached this court for reduction of compensation for the acquired land.
Briefly, the facts of the case are that the State of Haryana vide notification dated 25.8.2005 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “the Act”), acquired land situated in Village Nimnabad, Safidon, District Jind, for construction of BML Hansi Branch, Butana Branch. The Land Acquisition Collector assessed the market value of the land at Rs. 5 lacs per acre. The landowners feeling dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Collector, filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below determined the market value of the acquired land @ Rs. 7 lacs per acre. It is this award of the learned Reference Court which is impugned in the present appeal.
Learned State counsel submitted that the issue involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgment of this court in RFA No. 3298 of 2008 State of Haryana and another vs Nirmal Singh, decided on 17.8.2009, whereby the award of the learned court below was upheld.
Since this court has upheld the award of the learned court below, the appeal filed by the State for reduction of compensation does not survive. Accordingly, for the reasons recorded in Nirmal Singh's case (supra), the present appeal is dismissed.
( Rajesh Bindal) Judge
16.3.2010 sarita
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the State's appeal seeking reduction of compensation for land acquired by the Reference Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 deserves to be entertained?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Haryana and another vs Nirmal SinghReferred¶9
RFA No. 3298 of 2008 State of Haryana and another vs Nirmal Singh
2 provisions across 1 enactments
State of Haryana
Ratna
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
