The High Court
Case Details
122 (19 case cases) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA IN TH AT CHANDIGAR UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH RFA No. 1839 of 2012 (O&M) RFA N and and “18” connected cases Date of Decision: 21.11.2025 Date Chater Singh Singh and another Versus ...Appellants State of Hary f Haryana through Collector Jind, t Jind District Jind ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKE ARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. S.N. Pillania, Advocate for the appellant(s)-landowner( (in RFA Nos. 1839, 1840, 184 1871, 1872, 1873, 3266, 326 2012; and 455 & 2346 of 2013 for the respondent(s)-landowne (in RFA Nos. 311 & 312 of 200 2013) and downer(s) of 2007) wner(s) , 1841, 1842, 1843, 1844, 1845, 6, 3267, 3268, 4747 & 4820 of
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Abhishek Yadav, Deputy Adv for the appellant(s)-State of Ha (RFA Nos. 311 & 312 of 2007) for the respondent(s) (in all case Advocate General, Haryana Haryana 2007) and ll cases except RFA Nos. 311 & 312 of 20 of 2007) HARKESH KESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) **** This order shall dispose off se off a batch of the present nineteen (1 en (19) appeals bearing RFA Nos. Nos. 1839, 1840, 1841, 1842, 1843, 1844, 1844, 1845, 1871, 1872, 1873, 3266 , 3266, 3267, 3268, 4747 & 4820 of 2012; 45 ; 455 & 2346 of 2013; and 311 & 11 & 312 of 2007; as the same arise out of out of common acquisition / award. [2] In the appeals filed by the lan he landowners, they are seeking further enha r enhancement of compensation for t n for the acquired land, whereas in the app appeals filed by the State of H of Haryana, the prayer is for reduction th tion thereof. Since the common que n question of law and facts are DINESH KUMAR 2025.11.29 14:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:4)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:4)(cid:6)(cid:12)(cid:4)(cid:13)(cid:14)(cid:8)(cid:13)(cid:4)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:4)(cid:20)(cid:21)(cid:22)(cid:4)(cid:23)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:24)(cid:4)(cid:25)(cid:6)(cid:21)(cid:21)(cid:26)(cid:25)(cid:27)(cid:26)(cid:22)(cid:4)(cid:25)(cid:20)(cid:28)(cid:26)(cid:28)(cid:4) (cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) -2-(cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) 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 (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:4)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:4)(cid:6)(cid:12)(cid:4)(cid:13)(cid:14)(cid:8)(cid:13)(cid:4)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:4)(cid:20)(cid:21)(cid:22)(cid:4)(cid:23)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:24)(cid:4)(cid:25)(cid:6)(cid:21)(cid:21)(cid:26)(cid:25)(cid:27)(cid:26)(cid:22)(cid:4)(cid:25)(cid:20)(cid:28)(cid:26)(cid:28)(cid:4) (cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) -3-(cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) [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 (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:4)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:4)(cid:6)(cid:12)(cid:4)(cid:13)(cid:14)(cid:8)(cid:13)(cid:4)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:4)(cid:20)(cid:21)(cid:22)(cid:4)(cid:23)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:24)(cid:4)(cid:25)(cid:6)(cid:21)(cid:21)(cid:26)(cid:25)(cid:27)(cid:26)(cid:22)(cid:4)(cid:25)(cid:20)(cid:28)(cid:26)(cid:28)(cid:4) (cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) -4-(cid:4) (cid:4) (cid: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 (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:4)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:4)(cid:6)(cid:12)(cid:4)(cid:13)(cid:14)(cid:8)(cid:13)(cid:4)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:19)(cid:4)(cid:20)(cid:21)(cid:22)(cid:4)(cid:23)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:24)(cid:4)(cid:25)(cid:6)(cid:21)(cid:21)(cid:26)(cid:25)(cid:27)(cid:26)(cid:22)(cid:4)(cid:25)(cid:20)(cid:28)(cid:26)(cid:28)(cid:4) (cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) -5-(cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) 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 up- to-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
Decision
stand(s) disposed off. November 21, 2025 ‘dk kamra’ (cid:1) ( HARKESH MANUJA ) JUDGE(cid:1) (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:3)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:13)(cid:6)(cid:14)(cid:6)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:9)(cid:16)(cid:17)(cid:12)(cid:3)(cid:18)(cid:6)(cid:19)(cid:6) (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:8)(cid:17)(cid:5)(cid:4)(cid:9)(cid:22)(cid:23)(cid:3)(cid:6)(cid:19)(cid:6) (cid:20)(cid:3)(cid:16)(cid:6) (cid:20)(cid:3)(cid:16)(cid:6) (cid:21)(cid:17)(cid:6) (cid:21)(cid:17)(cid:6) DINESH KUMAR 2025.11.29 14:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document