http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: THE STATE OF PUNJAB

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: GURDIAL SINGH ETC.WITHCIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 6336

DATE OF JUDGMENT26/07/1995

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. PARIPOORNAN, K.S.(J)

CITATION:  1995 SCC  (5) 331        1995 SCALE  (4)594

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                         O R D E R      A notification under s.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published  in the State Gazette of Punjab on October 26, 1971 acquiring  70 Canals 48 Marlas of land for establishing a Mandi  (Market). The Land Acquisition Officer in his award dated February  18, 1972  classified  the  land  into  three categories and  determined the compensation at Rs.40,000/- & 10,000/- per acre respectively. On reference under s.18, the Additional District Judge in his award and decree dated June 3, 1976 classified the land into 5 categories and determined the compensation  at  the  rate  of  Rs.65,000/-,  50,000/-, 25,000/-,20,000/-and   15,000/-   per   acre   respectively. Dissatisfied therewith,the  claimants filled the appeal. The learned single  Judge by  his  judgement  and  decree  dated August 31,  1979 determined  the compensation at a flat rate of Rs.70,000/-  per acre  of the  entire land.  The  learned single Judge  has noted in the judgment that the counsel for the State  and the  claimants have  agreed  that  the  point raised in  the appeal  was squarely covered by a decision of that court  in   State of  Punjab v. Chand Singh, R.F.A. No. 1413/77 dated  August 23, 1979. Following that judgement the state’s appeal  as well  as the  claimants’ cross objections were disposed  of accordingly.  The Division Bench dismissed the appeal. Thus, this appeal by special leave.      It is  rather unfortunate  that nothing has been placed on record  whether the State has carried the decision of the Division Bench in Chand Singh’s case in appeal to this court and if  so what  was its result. Further, even that judgment has not been made part of record. Therefore, we are not in a position to  know on  what principle  the learned  Judge had granted a  flat rate  to the  entire land.  But in this case since the claimants as well as well as the State relied upon the said  judgment and requested the Court to dispose of the matter in  terms thereof, without any material on record, it will be  difficult  for  this  Court  to  find  whether  the determination of  Rs. 70,000/-  per acre  and at a flat rate

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

was proper  compensation. Accordingly  we are constrained to dismiss the appeal for the aforesaid reasons. No costs.      Since the  record has not been printed, the Registry is directed to refund printing charges.