November 13, 2025 Date of Deci PHOOL SINGH INGH AND ORS v. CORAM: HON HON'BLE
Case Details
1 RFA-408-1998 and o and other connected cases 112 IN THE JAB AND HARYANA AT THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB ARH CHANDIGARH RFA-408-1998 and other connected cases ses 025 f Decision: November 13, 2025 Date of Deci PHOOL SINGH INGH AND ORS. ........Appellants STATE OF HAR F HARYANA ........Respondent Versus CORAM: HON HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKE ARKESH MANUJA
Legal Reasoning
Present: Mr. R Mr. R.S. Longia, Advocate for the for the appellants. Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana Mr. A aryana. HARKESH MAN H MANUJA, J. (ORAL) **** A batch of 8 connected Regu A b tails Regular First Appeals (details whereof are giv re given on the foot of the judgme
Decision
d of dgment) shall stand disposed of by this commo mmon order, as they involve com and e common question of law and facts. 1998. For convenience, the facts are b For - are being taken from RFA-408- By way of present appeal, chall By w the , challenge has been laid to the judgment dated dated 12.11.1997 passed by the le dge, the learned Addl. District Judge, Kurukshetra, w tra, whereby the reference petition 8 of etition filed under Section 18 of the Land Acqui Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter ’) by after referred to as ‘the Act’) by the appellant(s) lant(s)-landowner(s), seeking enha tion enhancement of compensation was partly allow allowed. 2. Briefly stating, land measuring Brie ated ring 7.544 acres of land, situated within the reve revenue estate of Village Ghisa and Ghisarpari, Tehsil Thanesar and District Kuruksh rukshetra was acquired for the pub the e public purpose of widening the TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.11.30 07:18 I agree to specified portions of this document 2 RFA-408-1998 and other connected cases road vide notifications dated 01.06.1981 published on 16.06.1981 and 30.11.1981 published on 29.12.1981 issued under Sections 4 and 6 respectively of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘LAC’) vide its award dated 09.08.1986, assessed the market value of the acquired land, as follows:- Kind of Land 1. Chahi, Ghair Mumkin Bara and Ghair Mumkin Basak and house Rates per acre allowed Rs.21,000/- 2. Ghair Mumkin Khadan 3. Banjar Qadim 4. Ghair Mumkin Sarak Rs.12,000/- Rs.10,000/- Rs.15,000/- 3. The appellant(s)-landowner(s), feeling dissatisfied with the award, sought reference under Section 18 of the Act pleading that the acquired land was not less than Rs.1,00,000/- per acre as the land was situated near the abadi and grain market and thus, had greater potential value besides, claiming damages for crops standing on the field. 4. Upon notice, respondents filed written statement stating that LAC rightly awarded the compensation. 5. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by learned Reference Court:- “1. What was the market value of the acquired land at the time of its acquisition? OPP 2. Whether the possession of the acquired land was taken by the respondent-State in the year 1971 as alleged? If so, to what effect? OPP 3. Relief.” 6. In order to prove their case, both the parties led their respective evidences. The appellants examined PW1-Jarnail Singh and TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.11.30 07:18 I agree to specified portions of this document 3 RFA-408-1998 and other connected cases tendered documents namely copies of jamabandies and girdawaries in evidence. On the other hand, respondent examined RW1-Satywan, Kanungo and tendered documents namely, sale deeds (Exs.R-1, R-3) in evidence. 7. After considering the evidence, the learned Addl. District Judge, Kurukshetra, vide award dated 12.11.1997 partly allowed the petition(s) filed at the instance of appellant(s)-landowner(s) and enhanced the amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.21,000/- per acre for all categories along with statutory benefits in terms of Sections 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 of the Act. 8. Aggrieved of the aforesaid award dated 12.11.1997 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Kurukshetra, appellant(s)-landowner(s) filed the present appeal. 9. Impugning the aforementioned award, learned counsel for the appellant(s)-landowner(s) submits that possession of land in question was taken over by the PWD in the year 1972 for the purposes of widening of road, however, the learned Reference Court went wrong while declining the benefit of interest in terms of Section 23 (1-A) of the Act from the date of possession till the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act in the present case, though, he submits that benefit under Section 23(1-A) of the Act from the date of publication of notification under Section 4 of the Act till the date of passing of the award already stands released to the appellants-landowners. No other argument has been raised with respect to quantum of market value. 10. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent-State submits that factum of taking over of the possession of the land in question in the year 1972 by the PWD has not been established on TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.11.30 07:18 I agree to specified portions of this document 4 RFA-408-1998 and other connected cases record and as per the award passed by the LAC in terms of Section 11 of the Act, possession was taken over from the appellant(s)- landowner(s) only on the date of passing of award and not in the year 1972. Thus, learned State counsel submits that the appellant(s)- landowner(s) were not entitled for grant of any such benefit as claimed by them. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book. 12. A perusal of record in the form of cross-examination of RW- 1-Satyawan, Kanungo, Office of LAO, PWD (B&R), Pipli shows that the work of road from Babain to Akalgarh including village Ghisarpari started in the year 1972, but for some dispute pertaining to 6 khasra numbers (20/4, 7, 8, 11, 12 and 12) near abadi of village Ghisarpari, the construction got stopped. The deposition further clarifies that the entire road except the portion relating to above-mentioned 6 khasra numbers was constructed in the year 1972 itself. The Statement of RW-1- Satyawan, Kanungo being relevant for the purpose of adjudication of the case in hand is extracted hereunder:- “Stated that the land in question was acquired for the widening of road already existing on kutcha path which leads to Akalgarh-Babian road via Singhore. The land of the petitioners was an ordinary agricultural land and the adequate compensation has been granted to the landowners-petitioners. Ex.R-4 is the site plan which was prepared by me as per record and actual position. The acquired land has bee shown in red colour in Ex.R4 and the land sold vide sale deed Ex.R1 to R3 has been shown in green colour. No tree was standing in the acquired land. XXXXX by counsel for the petitioners. The road from Babain to Akalgarh was stopped in khasra Nos.20/4, 7, 8, 13, 12 and 11 near the abadi of village Ghisarpari by TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.11.30 07:18 I agree to specified portions of this document 5 RFA-408-1998 and other connected cases the petitioners. There was a case regarding this portion of land and so construction of the portion could not be done in the year 1972. Except this portion the entire road was constructed during the year 1972 itself. The award announced regarding this land acquired for the road was announced for the land of village Ramsaran Majra, Singhore.” 13. Furthermore, no effort was ever made by respondent-State to seek permission of the learned Reference Court so as to cross- examine RW-1-Satyawan, Kanungo to rebut his part of deposition regarding construction work of Akalgarh-Babain via Singhore road to village Ghisarpari been commenced in the year 1972. Besides it, the respondent-authority, being custodian of PWD (B&R) records never made any effort to produce material documents with respect to the construction work of Akalgarh-Babain via Singhore road in District Kurukshetra so as to rebut the case of appellant-landowner. 14. In such circumstances, based on the deposition made by RW-1-Satyawan, Kanungo it was sufficiently proved that the possession of the land in question was taken over and it stood utilized for widening of Babain to Akalgarh via Singhore Road to village Ghisarpari in the year 1972. In such circumstances, the award under Section 11 of the Act been passed by LAC on 09.08.1986 i.e. much after coming into force of Section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on the statute book, the appellant(s)-landowner(s) are held entitled for an amount calculated @12% per annum on the market value awarded by LAC for the period between the date of taking over of possession till the date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act in the present case i.e. from 31.12.1972 (as no specific date of taking over of possession is coming forth from the records, last date of the calendar year is being TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.11.30 07:18 I agree to specified portions of this document 6 RFA-408-1998 and other connected cases taken for reference) till 01.06.1972, in terms of Section 23 (1-A) of the Act. In addition, the appellant(s)-landowner(s) shall also be entitled for grant of statutory interest over the said amount. 15. Besides it, the landowner-appellant shall also be entitled for all the statutory benefits and interest on solatium on the enhanced market value/compensation as, provided under the provisions of the Act. 16. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the present appeal is disposed of with aforesaid modification. 17. 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. 18. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 13.11.2025 Tejwinder (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable Yes/No Yes/No Other connected cases RFA-409-1998 RFA-410-1998 RFA-411-1998 RFA-663-1998 RFA-664-1998 RFA-665-1998 RFA-666-1998 TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.11.30 07:18 I agree to specified portions of this document