Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
FA/446420/2007 4/ 4 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
FIRST
APPEAL No. 4464 of 2007
To
FIRST
APPEAL No. 4476 of 2007
With
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 11544 of 2007
In
FIRST
APPEAL No. 4464 of 2007
To
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 11556 of 2007
In
FIRST
APPEAL No. 4476 of 2007
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
:
=========================================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To be
referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=========================================================
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Appellant(s)
Versus
KANJI
BHURA - Defendant(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
SUNIT SHAH G.P. WITH MS. TRUSHA PATEL AGP for Appellant(s) : 1 -
2.
MR VIMAL M PATEL for Defendant(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 02/09/2008
ORAL
JUDGMENT
1. These
appeals are directed against the judgment and award dated 01.12.1998
passed by the learned Extra Assistant Judge, Junagadh in Land
Reference Case Nos.246/1988 to 258/1988 whereby, the said reference
cases were partly allowed.
2. The
facts in brief are that the appellant State proposed to acquire
the lands situated in Vilage Shobhavadala [Laskar], Taluka Visavadar,
District Junagadh, belonging to the respondent claimants, for
general purpose, under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894. On completion of all the legal formalities, the L.A.O. passed
his award dated 12.09.1986. Being aggrieved by the said award, the
claimants preferred applications before the authority requesting to
refer the issue to the competent Court for adjudication, which,
ultimately, came to be numbered as References. The Court below, after
appreciating the evidence on record, partly allowed the said
references. Hence, these appeals.
3. Heard
learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents
on record. The reference Court has adopted the yield method for
computing the amount of compensation and accordingly, deducted 50% of
the amount towards cultivation expenses and adopted a multiplier of
10 years for ascertaining the market value of the acquired lands,
which is in consonance with the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex
Court as well as this Court. Hence, I do not find any reasons to
disturb the findings recorded by the Court below qua the same. I am
in complete agreement with the reasonings given by the Court below
while recording the said findings.
4. However,
so far as the calculation of compensation for fruit-bearing trees in
L.A. Case No.255 of 1988 is concerned, the same deserves interference
in view of the fact that the claimant himself has stated in his
deposition before the reference Court that the total production of
Mangoes was 500 Kg. and that the price per Kg. was Rs.250/-. On that
basis, the annual income would come to Rs.750 and if 20% thereof is
deducted, the balance would come to Rs.600/- and Rs.60,000/- for 10
Mango trees. So far as Rayana trees are concerned, the claimant has
stated that the total production was 40 Kg. and that the price per
Kg. was Rs.2/-. Therefore, for two Rayana trees, the claimant will be
entitled for Rs.1,280/-. In all, the claimants in F. A.
No.4473/2007would be entitled for Rs.61,280/- for the fruit-bearing
trees apart from other benefits awarded by the reference Court.
Hence, the impugned award of the reference Court is required to be
modified accordingly.
5. In
view of the above, F.A Nos. 4464/2007 to 4472/2007 and 4474/2007 to
4476/2007 are dismissed. First Appeal No.4473/2007 is partly allowed
to the extent that the original claimants will be entitled for
Rs.61,280/- for the fruit-bearing trees and other benefits as awarded
by the reference Court. The impugned award of the reference Court
stands modified accordingly. The appeals stand disposed of. No order
as to costs. The civil applications also stand disposed of
accordingly.
[K.
S. JHAVERI, J.]
Pravin/*
Top