Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
FA/179820/2006 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
FIRST
APPEAL No. 1798 of 2006
To
FIRST
APPEAL No. 1818 of 2006
With
FIRST
APPEAL No. 2879 of 2005
To
FIRST
APPEAL No. 2891 of 2005
=========================================================
SPL.LAQ
OFFICER - Appellant(s)
Versus
MOHMAD
ASIF ALI BAGAS & 1 - Defendant(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
SUNIT S SHAH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER WITH MS KRINA CALLA, AGP
for Appellant(s) : 1,
None for
Defendant(s) : 1 -
2.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 30/09/2008
ORAL
ORDER
1. By
way of these groups of appeals, the State has challenged the
judgement and award of the Civil Judge (S.D), Bharuch (hereinafter
referred as the ‘Reference Court’) in Land Reference Case Nos. 1006
to 1018 of 1998 as well as 406 to 426 of 2001 whereby the reference
court awarded additional amount of compensation for the acquired
land.
2. The
facts of the case are that the lands of original claimants situated
in the village Ikhar, Ta. Amod, District : Bharuch were acquired for
the purpose of construction of Narmada Canal Project. The
notifications u/s 4 and 6 were published and thereafter, the Special
Land Acquisition Officer declared his award on 29.09.1997 whereby he
awarded Rs. 460/- per Are as against the claim of the claimants.
2.1 Being
aggrieved by the said award of the Special Land Acquisition Officer,
the original applicant filed reference under section 18 of the Land
Acquisition Act before the Reference Court. The reference court
passed the aforesaid award. Hence the present appeals.
3. Ms.
Krina Calla, learned AGP appearing for the State has submitted that
the reference court ought to have seen that the claimant has failed
to prove that the compensation awarded by the special land
acquisition officer is inadequate and not proper. She has further
submitted that the reference court has determined the market value of
the land in question for the whole area which is acquired. She has
submitted that the reference court ought to have seen that the whole
area is not being cultivated and the market value ought to have been
taken into consideration of the area which was being cultivated.
4. This
court has gone through the documentary evidence placed on record
alongwith the award of the reference court. The reference court has
relied upon various exhibits produced by the parties and after
considering the evidence in detail passed the aforesaid award. This
Court is in complete agreement with the reasonings and method adopted
and findings arrived at by the reference court.
5. Moreover,
this appeal is also covered by a decision of this Court wherein the
awards passed in reference cases of the adjoining village and same
Taluka have been challenged. This Court has upheld the method
adopted by the reference court in the land reference case nos. 2549
to 2557 of 1997 and dismissed the said group of appeals being appeals
no. 4098 to 4104 of 2007 vide order dated 02.09.2008. In that view
of the matter also, since the present group of appeals are covered by
the said decision rendered in First Appeals no. 4098 to 4104 of 2007,
this group of appeals are required to be dismissed.
6. In
the premises aforesaid, first appeals are dismissed. No order as
to costs.
(K.S.
JHAVERI, J.)
Divya//
Top