Chater Singh & Ors. Vs State of Haryana — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Chater Singh & Ors. Vs State of Haryana — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Severance damages enhanced from 10% to 25% of the market value of Rs. 3,00,000/- per acre for the land remaining with the landowners, with consequential/statutory benefits and interest under the 1894 Act including interest on solatium; Award dated 13.12.2011 modified; all landowner appeals disposed of and the State of Haryana appeals dismissed; pending miscellaneous applications disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the severance damages awarded by the Reference Court at 10% of the value of the land (Rs. 20,000/- per acre) are on the lower side and require enhancement in favour of the landowners. +1 more

Court's answer

Because the land was acquired for construction of the Siwana Mal Distributory, which dissected the land holdings into two parts causing loss of cultivation, inconvenience of connectivity between parcels, and reduction in value of remaining land (access, usability, irregularity of shape, loss of agricultural viability), damages towards severance are to be awarded at 25% instead of 10% of the market value of Rs. 3,00,000/- per acre for the land remaining with the landowners.

Ratio / Principle

The determination of market value at Rs. 3,00,000/- per acre by the learned Reference Court is based on proper appreciation of the pleadings and evidence, including sale deeds produced by both landowners and the State, especially the auction conducted by the Irrigation Department, Haryana on 02.07.2001 culminating in sale deed dated 22.11.2007 proved as Exhibit P-3.

Key takeaways

The sale instances produced on record by the respondents were rightly discarded by the learned Reference Court, since the auction dated 02.07.2001 (later translated into sale deed dated 22.11.2007, Ex. P-3) fetched the highest sale price among the sale instances on record.ratio¶38
The Award dated 13.12.2011 passed by the Reference Court is modified: the landowners are held entitled to 25% of market value as damages against severance of the land which remained with them, alongwith consequential/statutory benefits and interest as provided in the Act of 1894 (as amended upto-date), especially interest on solatium.ratio¶45

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Harkesh Manuja, J., oral), decision dated 21.11.2025 — disposes of a batch of nineteen RFAs (lead: RFA No. 1839 of 2012, Chater Singh and another v. State of Haryana through Collector Jind) arising out of a common acquisition/award. Land of 67 Kanal 09 Marla in Village Anchra Khurd, Tehsil Safidon, District Jind was acquired for construction of the Siwana Mal Distributory (S.4 notification 18.03.2002; S.6 notification 17.06.2002; Land Acquisition Act, 1894). LAC Award dated 15.01.2003 fixed Rs. 1,50,000/- per acre; the Reference Court (Additional District Judge, Jind) enhanced it to Rs. 3,00,000/- per acre on 30.10.2006 (Rs. 8,000/- per tubewell), was remanded on 20.07.2011, and in its fresh award dated 13.12.2011 kept Rs. 3,00,000/- per acre for nehri/chahi land, Rs. 1,50,000/- per acre for gair mumkin land, Rs. 15,000/- per tubewell, and 10% (Rs. 20,000/- per acre) severance damages. Held: the market value determination rests on proper appreciation of evidence, particularly the Irrigation Department auction of 02.07.2001 culminating in sale deed dated 22.11.2007 (Ex. P-3), the highest-priced instance, on which basis competing sale instances were rightly discarded; since the distributory dissected the holdings causing loss of cultivation, connectivity inconvenience and diminution in value of residual land, severance damages are enhanced from 10% to 25% of market value, with consequential/statutory benefits and interest including interest on solatium. Landowner appeals disposed of; State appeals dismissed; legal representatives of deceased landowners permitted to seek execution before the Executing Court.

122 (19 cases) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

RFA No. 1839 of 2012 (O&M) and “18” connected cases Date of Decision: 21.11.2025

Chater Sin g h and another

...Appellants

Versus

State of H a ryana through Collector Jind, District Jin d

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

Present: Mr. S.N. Pillania, Advocate for the appellant(s)-landown e r(s) (in RFA Nos. 1839, 1840, 1 8 41, 1842, 1843, 1844, 1845, 1871, 1872, 1873, 3266, 3 2 67, 3268, 4747 & 4820 of 2012; and 455 & 2346 of 20 1 3) and for the respondent(s)-lando w ner(s) (in RFA Nos. 311 & 312 of 2 0 07)

Mr. Abhishek Yadav, Deputy A d vocate General, Haryana for the appellant(s)-State of H aryana (RFA Nos. 311 & 312 of 200 7 ) and for the respondent(s) (in all c a ses except RFA Nos. 311 & 312 of 2 007)

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

This order shall dispose o ff a batch of the present nineteen ( 19) appeals bearing RFA Nos. 1839, 1840, 1841, 1842, 1843, 18 4 4, 1845, 1871, 1872, 1873, 32 6 6, 3267, 3268, 4747 & 4820 of 2012; 4 55 & 2346 of 2013; and 311 & 312 of 2007; as the same arise out o f common acquisition / award.

[2] In the appeals filed by the l a ndowners, they are seeking further en h ancement of compensation for the acquired land, whereas in the a p peals filed by the State of Haryana, the prayer is for reduction thereof. Since the common q u estion of law and facts are

DINESH KUMAR 2025.11.29 14:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

��

-2-

involved in these appeals, therefore, for the sake of convenience, facts are being culled out from RFA No. 1839 of 2012, the appeal filed by the landowners.

[3] The appellants-landowners, by instituting the appeal bearing RFA-1839-2012, preferred under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “1894 Act”) , seeks modification of the award dated 13.12.2011 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Jind (hereinafter to be referred as “Reference Court”) for enhancement of compensation amount.

FACTS

[4] Briefly, the facts are that in pursuance of Haryana Govt. Notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act issued on 18.03.2002, followed by Notification dated 17.06.2002 under Section 6 thereof, certain land of the respondents-landowners, situated within the revenue estate of Village Anchra Khurd, Tehsil Safidon, District Jind was acquired. The total land acquired was measuring 67 Kanal 09 Marla. The acquisition was made for public purpose, namely, for the construction of “Siwana Mal Distributory”. The Land Acquisition Collector, Jind (for short “LAC”) vide Award dated 15.01.2003, awarded Rs. 1,50,000/- per acre for all kind of the acquired land .

[5] Dissatisfied with the aforesaid Award, landowners / interested persons filed objections under Section 18 of the Act of 1894, which were allowed vide decision dated 30.10.2006 by the learned Reference Court, whereby market value of the acquired land was assessed / enhanced at the rate of Rs. 3,00,000/- per acre, while Rs. 8,000/- each for the two tubewells installed in the acquired land alongwith other statutory benefits.

DINESH KUMAR 2025.11.29 14:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

��

-3-

[6] Aggrieved thereof, the landowners preferred the first appeal(s), which were remanded back by this Court for fresh decision vide order dated 20.07.2011.

[7] Thereafter, learned Reference Court vide award dated 13.12.2011 decided the reference petition(s) filed by the appellant(s)landowner(s), while assessing the market value of land at the rate of Rs. 3,00,000/- per acre for nehri and chahi land and rate of gair mumkin land as awarded by the LAC, i.e. Rs. 1,50,000/- per acre was maintained, whereas a sum of Rs. 15,000/- each was awarded for the tubewells installed in the acquired land.

[8] Still dissatisfied with the aforesaid award dated 13.12.2011, the appellants-landowners are in appeal before this Court.

[9] Learned counsel for the appellants-landowners does not dispute the assessment of compensation for the acquired land, however, raises dispute with regard to award of damages on account of severance @ 10% of the value of the land i.e. Rs. 20,000/- per acre to be on the lower side.

[10] On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the prayer made on behalf of the appellants-landowners while submitting that the award of 10% as damages on account of severance is reasonable and it does not call for any interference.

DISCUSSION AND REASONING

[11] I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book / relevant record.

[12] A perusal of the record shows that the determination of market value at the rate of Rs. 3,00,000/- per acre as awarded by the

DINESH KUMAR 2025.11.29 14:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

��

-4-

learned Reference Court is based on proper appreciation of the pleadings as well as the evidence available on the record in the form of sale deeds produced by the appellant(s)-landowner(s) as well as the respondent(s)-State of Haryana, especially based on auction conducted by the Irrigation Department, Haryana on 02.07.2001 which finally culminated into sale deed dated 22.11.2007 and was proved on record as Exhibit P-3.

[13] Further, the sale instances which were produced on record by the respondents were rightly discarded by the learned Reference Court in the wake of the highest sale price fetched from the auction dated 02.07.2001 which later translated into the sale deed dated 22.11.2007 (Ex. P-3) and consequently, being the sale deed with the highest sale price among the sale instances produced on record.

[14] Furthermore, considering the fact the land in the present case(s) was acquired for the public purpose namely for construction of Siwana Mal Distributory which definitely and conclusively dissected the land holdings having bifurcated it into two parts, in such circumstances, the appellants/landowners are bound to suffer loss towards cultivation of land besides causing them inconvenience towards connectivity of the parcels left on either side of the Minor. Moreover, severance also causes reduction in value of remaining land due to alteration in access, useability, irregularity of shape and loss of agricultural viability etc., thus, in the humble opinion of this Court, it would be appropriate to award damages towards severance in favour of the landowners at the rate of 25%, instead of 10%, of the

DINESH KUMAR 2025.11.29 14:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

��

-5-

market value of Rs. 3,00,000/- per acre for the land which remained with the appellant(s)-landowner(s).

DECISION

[15] In the light of above, Award dated 13.12.2011 passed by the Reference Court is hereby modified. The landowners are held entitled to 25% of market value as damages against severance of land which remained with them alongwith consequential / statutory benefits and interest as provided in the Act of 1894 (as amended upto-date) especially the interest on solatium as well.

[16] Consequently, all the appeals filed by the landowner(s) are disposed off and the appeals filed by the State of Haryana are dismissed.

[17] Also, wherever the landowner(s) has/have unfortunately died in the appeal(s) / cross-objection(s) after filing thereof and the legal representatives not been impleaded, they shall be at liberty to seek execution of the present decision by moving appropriate application(s) before the learned Executing Court.

[18] Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand(s) disposed off.

November 21, 2025 ( HARKESH MANUJA ) ‘dk kamra’ JUDGE

��	��	��
��	��	��

DINESH KUMAR 2025.11.29 14:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document