HARBANS SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment will dispose of Letters Patent Appeal Nos. 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 139, 197, 198 of 1985, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241 of 1989 and 24 of 1992, as common questions of law and fact are involved therein.

(2.) Land of the claimant-appellants situated within the revenue estate of Bhatinda along with some other land was acquired under Section 8 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 on January 20, 1975. Compensation was offered by the competent authority for the acquired land. The claimants did not feel satisfy with the compensation offered and consequently sought a reference to the arbitrator. Additional District Judge, Bhatinda was appointed as arbitrator to determine the market value of the acquired land who fixed the value at different rates for different parcels of land. The award of the arbitrator was maintained by the learned Single Judge with certain clarifications. Hence, this Letters Patent Appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the landowners in these appeals are also entitled to compensation at the same rate that has been awarded by a Division Bench of this Court in Letters Patent Appeal No. 428 of 1985, Darshana Devi v. Union of India, decided on December 12, 1991 in respect of village Bhatinda and village Mehna as the acquisition of land is of the same date and for the same purpose. The Division Bench in Darshana Devi's case allowed compensation to the landowners of village Bhatinda at the following rates :