Rameshwar Singh Malik, J. - (1.) This batch of 33 appeals, out of which 15 appeals bearing RFA Nos. 4487, 4488, 4489, 5165 of 2011, 221 to 228 of 2014, 2027, 2028 and 2233 of 2015 have been filed by the State of Haryana and 18 appeals bearing RFA Nos. 5282 of 2010, 1195, 5802, 6672 and 7235 of 2012, 4978 to 4980, 5071, 5243, 5377, 5664 and 7222 of 2013, 2541, 8174 and 9804 of 2014, 540 and 1494 of 2015 have been filed by the land owners, is being decided vide this common order, as the same arise out of same acquisition and raise identical questions of law and facts.
(2.) Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that instant bunch of appeals is squarely covered by the order dated 10.12.2015 passed by this Court in RFA No. 3619 of 2009 (Municipal Corporation v. State of Haryana and others) , but there is a time gap between these two acquisitions. They further jointly pray for disposing of these appeals, in terms of the order dated 10.12.2015 passed by this Court in the case of Municipal Corporation (supra).
(3.) In view of the above, detailed facts of the case need not to be noticed. In the case of Municipal Corporation (supra), date of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ('the Act' for short) was 15.4.2002, whereas in the instant bunch of cases notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 12.8.2003, thus, there was a gap of 1 year and 4 months between these two acquisitions. It goes without saying that the land owners would be entitled for 12% annual increase for this time gap of 16 months, which would come to 16%.;