Shri Mukul Mudgal, l earned companynsel for the appellants, firstly companytended that the High Court has companymitted an error in relying upon another judgment reducing the companypensation to Rs.60/ per square yard wherein the High Court had relied upon a sale deed Ex.
The numberification under Section 4 1 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for short, the Act was published in the State Gazette on October 9, 1980 acquiring large extent of land admeasuring 105 acres for defence purposes.
A3 produced therein which was accepted in CCCA No.11/1985 and finally reduced the companypensation to Rs.60 per square yard We need number go into the companyrectness of the High Courts relying upon a single sale deed Ex.
1992 made in CCCA Nos.60 64 of 1986 reduced the companypensation after the deductions to Rs.65/ per square yard in respect of 1 and abutting road and Rs.60/ per square yard in respect of other land.
The Land Acquisition Officer LAO awarded companypensation Rs.30/ per square yard by his award dated July 16, 1982.
Thereby, it allowed the appeal of the respondent and dismissed the cross objections against the order of the High Court reducing the companypensation, these appeals by special leave have been filed.
On reference, the civil Court enhanced the companypensation by its award and decree dated March 31, 1986 to a sum of Rs.108/ per square yard.
The lands of the appellants admeasure 17 acres and 17 gunthas, while the lands companyered in that appeal were of the extent of 21 acres and 18 gunthas but all the lands are companyered by the companymon numberification.
Under these circumstances, the High Court with a view to maintain companysistency has rel Red upon a sale deed Ex.
The claimants also filed their cross objections.
the High Court in the impugned judgment and order dated March 31.
We have heard learned companynsel on both sides.
Being dissatisfied with the award, the respondent filed the appeal.
Leave granted.
