Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
FA/406020/2008 4/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
FIRST
APPEAL No. 4060 of 2008
=========================================================
SPL.LAQ
OFFICER - Appellant(s)
Versus
MANIBEN
AMBALAL & 4 - Defendant(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MS
TRUSHA PATEL, ASST GOVERNMENT PLEADER for
Appellant(s) : 1,
None for Defendant(s) : 1, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3,
1.2.4, 1.2.5, 1.2.6, 1.2.7, 1.3.1, 1.3.2, 1.3.3, 1.3.4, 1.3.5, 1.3.6,
1.3.7, 1.3.8, 1.3.9, 1.3.10,1.3.11 -
2.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 25/08/2008
ORAL
ORDER
1. Heard
learned counsel for the appellant.
2. By
way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgement and
award dated 10.12.2003 passed by the 2nd Extra Assistant
Judge and Special Judge (LAR) Ahmedabad Rural at Navrangpura in Land
Reference Case Nos. 85 to 91 of 2001 whereby the trial court awarded
compensation at the rate of Rs. 83 per sq. mts for the acquired land
as an additional compensation over and above the compensation already
awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer.
2. The
lands of the original claimants situated at Village Valad,
Gandhinagar were acquired for the public purpose of construction of
Narmada Canal. The notification under section 4 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 was published on 19.12.1994. After following
due procedure, the Special Land Acquisition Officer by his award
dated 15.04.1996 awarded compensation for the acquired land at the
rate of Rs. 6.60 per sq. mts as against the claim of Rs. 200/- per
sq. mts of the claimants.
2.1 Being
aggrieved by the said award of the Special Land Acquisition Officer,
the original applicants filed reference under section 18 of the Land
Acquisition Act before the 2nd Extra Assistant Judge and
Special Judge (LAR) Ahmedabad Rural at Navrangpura. The reference
court passed the aforesaid awards. Hence the present appeal.
3. Learned
AGP appearing for the State has submitted that the reference court
ought to have seen that the reference court has erred in not taking
into consideration that the Special Land Acquisition Officer has
fixed the market price after taking into consideration the location
of each piece of land, prevailing market rate, type of land and other
relevant factors and also the nature of land, area, level and
development of the acquired land and considering the sale instances
of nearby area of last five years. She has further submitted that
the reference court ought to have seen that the compensation awarded
by the Officer is just and proper and the original claimants are not
at all entitled to get additional compensation.
4. This
court has gone through the materials placed on record alongwith the
award of the reference court. The reference court has relied upon
various documentary evidences produced by the parties and after
considering the evidence in detail and observed in para 12 as under:
12. …
Now, from the record, it clearly infers that the land of village
valad which were previously acquired in pursuant to the publication
of Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act on 29/12/87 and the
compensation payable was determined by the Reference Court at the
rate of Rs. 67.00 per square meter as additional compensation reduced
by the Hon’ble High Court in F.A. No. 2481/97 to the tune of Rs.
53.00 per square meter. While in the present case, the land of
village Valad itself were acquired in pursuant to the Notification
under section 4 of the Act dated 19/12/94 and therefore it seems that
there is a gap of 6 years and 11 months. The ld. Advocate for the
claimant has submitted that the claimant should be given reasonable
rise in price of land at the rate of 10% pa relying on the principle
laid down by the Hon’ble High Court that when there is time lag
between the Notification published under section 4(1) of the Act, the
claimant be given reasonable rise in the price of the land at the
rate of 10% p.a. and on this point he has relied on the judgement
of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in a case of Special Land
Acquisition Officer, Bharuch v/s. Motibhai Mohanbhai reported in 1997
(2) GLH Pg. 773.
5. The
reference court looking to the time gap of 6 years and 11 months and
also looking to the locations of the acquired land, fertility, the
purpose for which the lands are acquired, the date of publication of
notification under section 4 etc calculated the market value of the
lands in question at the rate of Rs. 89.60 per sq. mt. I am in
complete agreement with the reasonings adopted and findings arrived
at by the reference court and therefore do not see any reason for
causing interference in the matter. This appeal is therefore
required to be dismissed.
6. In
the premises aforesaid, first appeal is dismissed. No order as to
costs.
(K.S.
JHAVERI, J.)
Divya//
Top