R.L.ANAND, J. - (1.) BY this judgment, I dispose of two appeals i.e. R.F.A. No. 172 of 1991 titled Parsini Devi and others v. The State of Punjab and R.F.A. No. 1266 of 1991 titled Punjab Wakf Board v. State of Punjab and others, as both these appeals have arisen from the same judgment dated 24.11.1990, passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Sangrur who awarded compensation with regard to Chahi at the rate of Rs. 60,000/- per acre while the market value of the gair mumkin land was determined at a rate of Rs. 40,000/- per acre. The trial Court also awarded the benefits to the land owners under Sections 23-(1A), 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that vide Notification No. 12737-6HB III/82/21131 dated 16.9.1983 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 followed by declaration under Section 6 of the Act vide Notification No. 9(187)-83/1/HBVI dated 12.12.1985, land measuring 81 Kanals 14 Marlas situated in the area of Sunam, Hadbast No. 28 was acquired by the State Government for public purposes i.e. for construction of Civil Hospital, Sunam, and the award was given by the Land acquisition Collector, Sunam, who assessed the market value of the chahi at the rate of Rs. 42,000/- per acre. The Land Acquisition Collector further assessed the market value of the Gair Mumkin land at the rate of Rs. 25,000/- per acre. The land owners were not satisfied with the award of the Land Acquisition Collector and they made the references under Section 18 of the said Act which were referred to the Court of the learned Additional District Judge, Sangrur, who called upon the parties to file their replies and decided the matter vide the impugned award dated 24.11.1990. The case set up by the landowners was that the market value of the acquired land as assessed by the Collector was inadequate. According to the appellants Parsini Devi and others, the market value of the land should be ruppes three lacs per acre on the date of the acquisition. They also claimed costs of tubewell and Kotha amounting to Rs. 30,000/- besides Rs. 8,000/- for the trees and also Rs. 25,000/- for the standing crops. According to the Wakf Board the value of the land was not less than Rs. 100/- per square yard on the date of the notification under Section 4 of the Act. This aspect of the case was disputed by the State Government. Resultantly, the Court framed the following issues in the reference of Smt. Parsini Devi and others:- 1. What was the market price of the acquired land at the time of notifications ? OPA 2. Whether the applicants are entitled to the costs of tubewell, Kotha and trees standing in the acquired land as allege ? OPA 3. Whether the applicants are entitled to acquisition charges at the rate of Rs. 30/- per cent of the market value ? OPA 4. Whether the applicants are entitled to interest at the rate of Rs. 12/- per cent from the date of possession ? OPA 5. Relief. In the land reference of Punjab Wakf Board the Court framed the following issues:- 1. What was the market value of the acquired land at the time of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act ? OPA 2. Relief.
(3.) IT may be mentioned here that two more land references are sent to the Court of Additional District Judge for determination and all the references were consolidated.;