Arun Palli, J. - (1.) Vide this judgment, I shall decide a bunch of 60 regular first appeals, of which 22 i.e. RFA Nos.3541 of 2007; 376 to 381, 703 to 706, 827, 828, 882, 2152, 2644 to 2647, 2914 to 2919 of 2012, 4502 of 2013 and X-Objr-4-CI-2014 in RFA No.882 of 2012 have been preferred by the claimant-landowners, whereas the rest 38 appeals i.e. RFA Nos.1949, 2141, 2142, 2163 to 2169, 6014 to 6021, 6030 to 6045 of 2012 and X-Objr-34-CI2014 in RFA No.6030 of 2012 have been filed by the respondent-Indian Oil Corporation Limited (for short, 'IOC'), the beneficiary of the acquisition. For, the facts involved in all these appeals are similar, and the question that is required to be determined being common, the same are disposed of by a common judgment. By consensus the facts are being culled out from Regular First Appeal No.4502 of 2013 [Sampuran Singh v. State of Haryana and others].
(2.) Vide notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), published on 12.12.1994, an area measuring 97 acres 4 kanals and 1 marla, comprised in the revenue estate of villages Shodapur, Khukhrana, Nohra, Sithana and Baholi, Tehsil and District Panipat, was sought to be acquired for construction of Broad Gauge Railway siding, for Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., to cater to Panipat Oil Refinery. Publication under Section 6 of the Act was made on 13.06.1996. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, 'the Collector'), vide award No.4, dated 05.01.1996, assessed the market value of the acquired land @ Rs. 1,75,000/- per acre i.e. Rs. 35.53 per sq. yard. Being aggrieved with the assessment and the compensation awarded by the Collector, landowners filed objections under Section 18 of the Act, and resultantly the Collector referred the matter to the civil court for determination. But, as vide an earlier notification dated 25.05.1993, land measuring 4.63 acres, which also formed part of the revenue estate of the same village i.e. Sithana, was acquired for IOC, and the reference court vide its award dated 07.06.1999, had assessed the market value of the said land @ Rs. 83/- per sq. yard, the reference court vide award, dated 30.05.2002, by awarding 12% annual increase for the time difference i.e. one year and seven months, between the notification in the previous acquisition and the present proceedings, awarded compensation @ Rs. 97.94 per sq. yard. However, in the appeals preferred by the landowners as also the State against the award, dated 07.06.1999 [Khan Chand Bajaj v. State of Haryana and another], this court vide order and judgment dated 05.11.2008, rendered in RFA No.3719 of 1999 & other connected matters [Hukam Chand v. State of Haryana and others], set aside the said award, for the sale instances (Ex.RA to Ex.RG), which were relied upon by the State, were not taken into consideration by the reference court. Consequently, the matter was remitted to the reference court for re-decision. For, the very basis of the decision of the reference court in this case i.e. award dated 07.06.1999, had become extinct, in the appeals preferred by the IOC, the award dated 30.05.2002, rendered in the matter in hand, was also set aside by this court, and the matter was remanded, vide order and judgment dated 26.07.2010, rendered in RFA No.2886 of 2002 [Indian Oil Corporation Limited v. Om Parkash and others]. It is not disputed that even on re-consideration, the reference court vide its award, dated 19.11.2010, in the matter of Hukam Chand and Khan Chand Bajaj reached the same conclusion as earlier and assessed the market value of the land at the same rate i.e. Rs. 83/- per sq. yard. Further, in the appeals preferred by the landowners, as also the IOC against the said award, this court, vide order and judgment dated 25.02.2016, rendered in RFA No.2517 of 2011 [Indian Oil Corporation Limited v. Khan Chand Bajaj and others], dismissed the appeals filed by the IOC-beneficiary department, whereas the appeals filed by the claimant-landowners were partly accepted. Resultantly, the compensation awarded to the claimant-landowners was enhanced to Rs. 5,20,600/- per acre i.e. Rs. 107.56 per sq. yard. Likewise, in the present case the reference court, again, by relying upon its earlier award in the case of Hukam Chand , awarded 12% annual increase for the time difference between the two notifications, and granted compensation @ Rs. 97.94 per sq. yard, vide awarded dated 30.08.2011. That is how, as indicted above, the landowners have appealed for further enhancement and the IOC-beneficiary department prays to set aside the award rendered by the reference court.
(3.) All what has been argued by Mr. Ashwani Talwar, learned counsel for the landowners is that, the reference court had relied upon an earlier award dated 19.11.2010, rendered in the case of Khan Chand Bajaj , vide which the market value of the land was assessed @ Rs. 83/- per sq. yard, and since the notification under Section 4 of the Act in the present proceedings was issued on 12.12.1994, one year and seven months later, by awarding 12% annual increase, the reference court assessed the market value of the acquired land @ Rs. 97.94 per sq. yard. Thus, he submits that, for, this court vide its judgment dated 25.02.2016, rendered in RFA No.2517 of 2011 [Khan Chand Bajaj and other connected appeals], has further enhanced the compensation to Rs. 5,20,600/- per acre i.e. Rs. 107.56 per sq. yard, the appellants-landowners are entitled to 12% annual increase upon the market value of the land i.e. 107.56 per sq. yard as on 25.05.1993.;