Dismissed

State of Punjab v. Mayawanti & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Aug 2010RFA/3197/1992

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The State of Punjab filed a revisional appeal against an award enhancing compensation for acquired land for a railway siding. The single judge upheld the award relying on an earlier High Court judgment. The Court dismissed the appeal due to lack of merit and the nominal amount involved.

What did the court decide?

The appeal filed by the State of Punjab against the award of enhanced compensation was dismissed.

State of Punjab Vs Mayawanti & Ors. — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh

¶2

RFA No. 3197 of 1992 (O&M)

¶3

The State of Punjab and another .... Appellants vs Mayawanti and another ..... Respondents

¶4

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal

¶5

Present: Mr. Yatinder Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.

¶6

Rajesh Bindal J.

¶7

The State of Punjab is 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 reduction of compensation awarded for the acquired land.

¶8

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the State of Punjab vide notification dated 11.5.1982 issued under Section 4 of the Act, acquired land for providing Railway siding to Food Grain Godown at Rasulpur Saidan and Alipur Arian, Tehsil and District Patiala. The Land Acquisition Collector vide his award dated 5.6.1986 assessed the market value of the acquired land @ 1,53,132/- per acre. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners/claimants filed objections. The learned Additional District Judge, on reference under Section 18 of the Act, enhanced the compensation to 1,67,000/- per acre, relying on earlier judgment of this court in RFA No. 1039 of 1985 Dr. Parma Nand vs State of Punjab decided on 30.4.1987. It is this award which is impugned in the present appeal.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant very fairly submitted that the learned court below having assessed the compensation payable to the landowners on account of acquisition of land relying upon an earlier judgment of this court in Dr. Parma Nand's case (supra), there is no merit in the present appeal.

¶10

As the compensation has been assessed by the learned Reference Court relying upon a judgment of this court, I do not find any merit in the present appeal. Moreover, a perusal of the paper-book shows that the amount involved in the appeal is merely ` 3,020/- and the acquisition took place more than 28 years back.

¶11

In view of the above, the present appeal is dismissed.

¶12

5.8.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge

State of Punjab v. Mayawanti & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Punjab v. Mayawanti & Ors.

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

State of Haryana Vs Sham Sunder

State of Haryana Vs Dharam Chand

Kapoor Singh Vs Gurmeet Singh and Another

Amar Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Union of India Vs Ram Rattan

State of Punjab Vs Jagmel Singh & Ors.