Lachhman Singh vs State of Haryana

Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.—Identical question of law and facts are involved in these nine Regular First Appeals bearing Nos. 1125 to 1130 and 1221 to 1223 of 1993 filed by the claimants against award dated 12.11.1992 passed by Additional District Judge, Gurgaon, therefore, all the appeals are being disposed of by a common judgment. However, the facts are being taken from RFA No. 1125 of 1993 titled as Lachhman Singh v. State of Haryana.

Vide notification dated 18.12.1984 issued u/s 4 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ''the Act'') published in the Government Gazette dated 22.1.1995 followed by a notification u/s 6 of the Act published in the Government Gazette on 3.12.1985, land measuring 3.237 acres situated in the revenue estate of village Noorpur Jharsa, Tehsil Gurgaon was acquired for the construction of (i) a road from Badshahpur Noorpur Jharsa (ii) Noorpur Jharsa to village Sakatpur via Palra District. The District Revenue Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Collector, Gurgaon (for short ''the Collector'') vide his award dated 21.2.1986 determined the compensation of acquired Chahi land @ Rs. 35,000/ - per acre. Provoked by the inadequacy of the compensation, the claimants had filed Objections u/s 18 of the Act and sought reference to the Civil Court. The Collector referred the Objections to the Civil Court for adjudication. Both the parties led their oral as well as documentary evidence. The claimants principally relied upon an earlier award dated 25.3.1991 (Ex.P1) passed by Sh. M.S. Sullar, Addl. District Judge, Gurgaon. The learned Reference Court after appreciating the entire evidence on record, found the judgment Ex.P1 to be a relevant piece of evidence and awarded compensation @ Rs. 85,000/ - per acre. Still unsatisfied, the claimants have come up in appeal before this Court.

Sh. Sudhir Aggarwal, learned Counsel for the claimants has very fairly stated at the bar that against award Ex.P1, on which claimants have relied upon, no appeal was filed by the claimants, therefore, the said award had attained finality and the rates have been frozen. He also submits that besides this award (Ex.P1) there is no evidence on the basis of which claimants could pray for enhancement of compensation. On the candid and fair statement made at the bar by counsel for the appellant, the present appeal is found to be without any merit as there is no evidence available on record to be appreciated further.

In view of the above, the present appeals are dismissed without any order as to costs.