SUKHBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the present appeal is to the award of the learned court below whereby the claim made by the appellant for trees standing on the acquired land, was partly rejected.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that land of the appellant measuring 3 Kanals and 8 Marlas situated in the revenue estate of village Karamsana, Tehsil Ellenabad, District Sirsa and the trees standing thereon were sought to be acquired by State of Haryana for construction of Karamsana parallel minor from RD No. 13060 to 20060 tail, Village Karamsana, vide notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short "the Act"), on 30.05.2003. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 19.9.2003. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short "the Collector") did not award compensation for trees. The landowner feeling dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, filed objections. The learned court below partly accepted the claim made by the appellant for trees standing on the acquired land.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that document Ex.P-9 and the statements of the witnesses produced have been totally ignored by the learned court below while assessing the compensation for the trees standing on the acquired land. Though he initially stated that nine trees were standing on the acquired land, however, subsequently he pointed out that there are more trees standing. After inspection, it was found that total 37 trees were standing on the acquired land. The aforesaid fact was verified by the officials of the Forest Department. It was so stated by them before the learned court below when they appeared in the witness-box. Once the fact of 37 trees standing on the acquired land was admitted in terms of the record produced and the statements of the official witnesses, the appellant is entitled to get compensation thereof, which has also been assessed by the Forest Department.