TARSEM LAL & ANR. TARSEM LAL & v. AND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR, PWD
Case Details
and other connected cases RFA-297-1997 and other connected cases 1 106 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH RFA-297-1997 (O&M) and other connected cases and other connected cases November 11, 2025 Date of Decision: November 11, 2025 Date of Decision: TARSEM LAL & ANR. TARSEM LAL & ........Appellants Versus AND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR, PWD (B&R) JALANDHAR AND AND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR, PWD ( LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR, PWD ( ANR. ........Respondents
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. Amandeep Saini, Advocate for Mr. Amandeep Saini, Advocate for Mr. M.L. Saini, Advocate for the Mr. M.L. Saini, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Addl. A.G. Punjab. Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Addl. A.G. Punjab. Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Addl. A.G. Punjab. HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) HARKESH MANUJA **** A batch of 4 connected Regular First Appeals (details whereof A batch of 4 connected Regular First Appeals (details whereof A batch of 4 connected Regular First Appeals (details whereof A batch of 4 connected Regular First Appeals (details whereof are given on the foot of the judgment) shall stand disposed of by this are given on the foot of the judgment) shall stand disposed of by this are given on the foot of the judgment) shall stand disposed of by this are given on the foot of the judgment) shall stand disposed of by this common order, as they involve common question of law and facts. common order, as they involve common question of law and facts. common order, as they involve common question of law and facts. For convenience, the facts are being taken from RFA-297-1997. For convenience, the facts are being taken from RFA For convenience, the facts are being taken from RFA By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgment By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgment By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgment By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgment dated 13.02.1995 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar, dated 13.02.1995 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar, dated 13.02.1995 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar, dated 13.02.1995 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar, filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, whereby the reference petition filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, whereby the reference petition 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the appellants 1894 (hereinafter refe landowners, seeking rred to as ‘the Act’) by the appellants-landowners, seeking enhancement of compensation was allowed. enhancement of compensation was allowed. 2. Briefly stating, land measuring 5.68 acres of land, situated within Briefly stating, land measuring 5.68 acres of land, situated within Briefly stating, land measuring 5.68 acres of land, situated within Briefly stating, land measuring 5.68 acres of land, situated within , District Jalandhar was acquired for the the revenue estate of Village Laroya, District Jalandhar was acquired for the , District Jalandhar was acquired for the the revenue estate of Village Bholath road vide notifications dated public purpose for construction of Bhogpur-Bholath road vide notifications dated Bholath road vide notifications dated public purpose for construction 19.10.1989 and 05.04.1991 issued under Sections 4 and 6 respectively of the 19.10.1989 and 05.04.1991 issued under Sections 4 and 6 respectively of the 19.10.1989 and 05.04.1991 issued under Sections 4 and 6 respectively of the 19.10.1989 and 05.04.1991 issued under Sections 4 and 6 respectively of the Award dated Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘LAC’) passed Award dated Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘LAC’) passed Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘LAC’) passed per acre i.e. assessing the market value at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per acre i.e. assessing the market value at the rate of 18.05.1992 assessing the market value at the rate of per marla along with other statutory benefits. Rs.312.50/- per marla along with other statutory benefits. per marla along with other statutory benefits. TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.11.18 00:54 I agree to specified portions of this document 2 3. RFA-297-1997 and other connected cases The appellant-landowner, feeling dissatisfied with the award, sought reference under Section 18 of the Act pleading that the LAC had not taken into consideration all the relevant facts as the acquired land was adjoining village abadi and could be used both for residential as well as commercial purposes. Moreover, the acquired land adjoins the G.T. Road and certain shops already existed in its vicinity. 4. Upon notice, respondents filed written statement stating that LAC rightly awarded the compensation as the acquired land was agricultural in nature and in consonance with the prevailing rates in the locality at that time. In turn, appellants-petitioners filed replication controverting the allegations made by the respondents and reiterating their earlier stand. 5. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by learned Reference Court:- “1. Whether the compensation awarded by the Collector is inadequate as alleged in the objection petition? OPP 2. To what amount of enhance compensation, the petitioner is entitled to? OPP 3. Relief.” 6. In order to prove their case, both the parties led their respective evidences. The appellants examined Ram Saroop as PW-1, Tarsem Lal as PW2, Charanjit Singh as PW-3, Sohan Singh as PW-4 and Harminder Singh as PW5 besides tendering certain documents in evidence. 7. After considering the evidence, the learned Additional District Judge, Hisar, vide award dated 13.02.1995 allowed the petition filed at the instance of appellants and enhanced the amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.750/- per marla. 8. Aggrieved of the aforesaid award dated 13.02.1995, the respondent-State approached this Court by way of RFA-1438-1988 which came to be dismissed. TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.11.18 00:54 I agree to specified portions of this document 3 9. RFA-297-1997 and other connected cases The appellants-landowners being aggrieved of the award dated 13.02.1995 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Jalandhar filed the present appeal. 10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record it is apparent that prior to the acquisition in hand, vide notification dated 07.09.1983 issued under Section 4 of the Act, 5.68 acres of land situated within the same revenue estate of village Laroya, District Jalandhar was acquired for the same public purpose i.e. for construction of Bhogpur- Bholath road. Subsequently, the learned Reference Court vide its decision dated 05.01.1988 passed in reference petitions preferred at the instance of appellants-landowners assessed the market value @ Rs.750/- per marla. The said award dated 05.01.1988 forms part of the record as Ex.P-1 and has been relied upon by the learned Reference Court for the purpose of determination of market value in favour of the appellants-landowners. As a matter of fact, the award dated 05.01.1988 (Ex.P-1) stands upheld by this Court vide its decision dated 22.08.2008 passed in RFA-1438-1988. 11. Admittedly, vide previous notification dated 07.09.1983 issued under Section 4 of the Act, the same land situated within the same revenue estate of Village Laroya District Jalandhar was acquired for the same public purpose i.e. for construction of Bhogpur-Bholath road and thus, in such circumstances, the appellants-landowners need to be granted the benefit of appreciation @ 8% per annum for the time gap of 6 years between the date of issuance of two notifications as in case of previous acquisition notification under Section 4 was issued on 07.09.1983 whereas, present acquisition relates to notification dated 19.10.1989 and thus, the market value as on the said date comes to Rs.1,77,600/- per acre i.e. Rs.1110/marla. 12. Besides it, the landowner-appellant shall also be entitled for all the statutory benefits and interest on solatium, provided under the provisions of the Act. TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.11.18 00:54 I agree to specified portions of this document 4 RFA-297-1997 and other connected cases 13. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the present appeal is
Decision
disposed of with aforesaid modification. 14. Wherever the landowner(s) has/have unfortunately expired in the appeal(s)/cross-objection(s) after filing thereof and the legal heirs have not been impleaded, they shall be at liberty to seek execution of the present decision by moving appropriate applications before the learned Executing Court. 15. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 11.11.2025 Tejwinder (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable Yes/No Yes/No Other Connected cases RFA-298-1997 RFA-299-1997 RFA-300-1997 TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.11.18 00:54 I agree to specified portions of this document