An appeal was filed against an award reducing compensation for acquired land. The single-judge bench noted the dispute involved a trivial amount after over two decades and dismissed the appeal without interference.
The appeal was dismissed; the award passed by the learned court below stands affirmed.
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. 3174 of 1992 (O&M)
The State of Punjab ... Appellant vs Jagmel Singh and another ..... Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: Mr. Yatinder Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
Rajesh Bindal J.
The State of Punjab is in appeal before this Court against the award passed by learned court below seeking reduction in the amount of compensation awarded for the acquired land.
Briefly, the facts are that State of Punjab vide notification dated 9.2.1988 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the Act') acquired land situated within the revenue estate of village Kasumbheri, Hadbast No. 217, Tehsil Sirhind, District Patiala for construction of Kasumbheri minor. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, the Collector') assessed the market value of different kinds of land at different rates. The landowners filed objections which were referred to the learned Court below for consideration, who keeping in view the earlier award, Ex. A2, determined the market value of the acquired land @ 1,00,000/- per acre for chahi, 65,000/- per acre for barani and ` 45,000/-per acre for banjar kind of land. It is this award which is impugned in the present appeal.
Learned State counsel could not dispute the fact that the learned court below had determined the market value of the land on the basis of earlier award, Ex. A2. He was also unable to state that any appeal has been filed against the award, Ex. A2. Moreover, the dispute sought to be raised by the appellant in the present appeal is regarding meager amount of ` 5,688.25 paise. Keeping in view that amount involved in the present appeal is quite small and the acquisition having taken place more than 22 years back, I do not find any reason to interfere at this stage.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
(Rajesh Bindal) Judge
5.8.2010 vs.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Court should interfere with an old award that was determined by referencing an earlier award when the monetary dispute is meager.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
State of Punjab
Jagmel Singh
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
