- (1.) This judgment will dispose of Letters Patent Appeal Nos. 706 of 1980, 120, 131, 132, 314, 325, 326, 450 and 451 of 1981; because they raise common questions of law. The learned counsel for the parties are agreed that these appeals be heard and disposed of together.
(2.) Since the controversy between the parties to these appeals is confined to only one point, namely, quantum of compensation for loss of earnings of the appellants due to acquisition of land, it will suffice to recount briefly the facts bearing upon this issue.
(3.) The appellants in these appeals had set up poultry farms on the outskirts of Union Territory, Chandigarh, in the areas falling within the State of Punjab and Haryana. Some of the appellants had set up their farms on their own lands while others had taken lands on lease to start this business. In 1971, the State of Punjab acquired vast tracts of land adjoining the Union Territory of Chandigarh for setting up the Urban Estate of Sahibzada Ajit Singh Nagar (popularly known as 'Mohali'). The lands over which the appellants other than Smt. Savitri Devi, appellant had set up their poultry farms were also acquired. In compliance with the notices, issued under section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act, (for short 'the Act') the appellants-claimants filed claim applications for compensation. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short 'the Collector') awarded compensation for the acquired land on the 24th of March, 1972. However, he determined the compensation for poultry sheds and godowns, structures et cetera by an award dated the 29th of March, 1973. The Collector came to the conclusion that the appellants derived an income of Re. 1/- per bird per month from the poultry business. Consequently, he allowed them compensation for loss of earnings equivalent to the income of one month at the above mentioned rate. The claimants were not satisfied with the award of the Collector. They filed applications under section 18 of the Act. The District Judge, Rupnagar, vide his judgment dated the 24th of June, 1977, awarded the claimants compensation for the loss of earnings equivalent to their income for 25 months at the rate of Re. 1/- per bird per month. State of Haryana also, in the year 1973, acquired land on the periphery of Union Territory of Chandigarh, for setting up the satellite township of Panchkula. The land on which Smt. Savitri Devi, the appellant in Letters Patent Appeal No. 706 of 1980, had set up her poultry farm was acquired for this purpose. Neither the Collector nor the learned Additional District Judge awarded any compensation to the claimants for loss of earnings. The appellants from both the States of Punjab and Haryana filed appeals against the judgments of the learned District Judge, Rupnagar and the learned Additional District Judge, Ambala. Some claimants from Punjab filed cross-objections in the State-Appeals. A learned Single Judge of this Court allowed the appeals filed on behalf of the State of Punjab and the claimants from Haryana. He decreased the compensation awarded to the claimants of Punjab from 24 months' income to six months' income. Similarly, he allowed compensation to the claimants from Haryana for the loss of their earnings at the same rate and to the same extent. He dismissed the appeals and cross-objections filed by the claimants from Punjab. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge, Smt. Savitri Devi, a claimant from Haryana filed Letters Patent Appeal No. 706 of 1980, whereas the remaining appeals have been filed by the claimants from Punjab.;