Gujarat High Court High Court

Executive vs Baldevpuri on 18 July, 2008

Gujarat High Court
Executive vs Baldevpuri on 18 July, 2008
Author: Ks Jhaveri,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

FA/807019/1999	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

FIRST
APPEAL No. 8070 of 1999
 

 
 
=========================================================

 

EXECUTIVE
ENGINEER & 1 - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

BALDEVPURI
SOMPURI & 4 - Defendant(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MS
TRUSHA PATEL, AGP,  for
Appellant(s) : 1 - 2. 
MR GM AMIN for Defendant(s) : 1 -
5. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 18/07/2008 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

1. This
appeal is directed against the judgement and award passed in Land
Reference Case No.260/91 passed by the learned Special Judge (LAQ),
Mirzapur, Ahmedabad (Rural) on 27.2.1998 whereby the said Reference
was partly allowed.

2. In
the present case the land in question was acquired for Hadmatia
approach road joining National Highway No.8. The notification
regarding acquisition of said land was declared on 6.1.1986 under
section 4 of the Act. The notification under section 6 was issued on
25.5.1987. The Special Land Acquisition Officer had awarded
compensation at the rate of Rs.3.00 per square meter. Feeling
aggrieved by the said award the claimants filed Land Acquisition
Reference No.260/1991 which came to be allowed partly and the
claimants were awarded additional compensation at the rate of Rs.60/-
per square meter. Hence the present appeal.

3. Heard
the learned Advocate for the appellant and perused the documents on
record. In para 6 of the judgement the Reference Court has mainly
relied upon a judgement of this Court whereby this Court allowed 10%
increase by way of appreciation of land. Para 6 reads as under:

[6] It
has to be noted that notification of this group case under Act 4 was
declared on 6.1.86 And under Act.6 notification was declared on
25.5.87. In case No.927 to 951 in Ahmedabad (Rural) Extra Assistant
Judge Court of LAQ reference of land of farmers of Vavol was sited
and notification regarding the said act was on 7.7.83 & under
notification was given on 13.9.84. Rates were Rs.20/- to 24/- per
Sq. mt. Given by LAQ officer court has given Rs.80/- Rs.72 &
Rs.74/- per sq. mt. Award was declared under same condition land
reference case No.215/84 on reading Mirzapur court judgement per sq.
mt. Rates were taken rs.130/- & Rs.80/- per sq. mt. Such
agreements were put forwarded by advocate Shri V.P. Patel Mirzapur
court’s Ank.21. Judgement LAQ case No.389188 to 414/88, the one whose
notification under act 4was given in year 1981 & under act 6
notification was given & compensation awarded was Rs.77.50 to
595/95 was made at Division bench & Gujarat High Court was agreed
to compensate award at rate of Rs.50/- per sq.mt.

Shri
V.P. Patel 1998(1), GLR Deputy General Manager, ONGC of Division
bench of court has sited judgement of Chaturji Lalji against ONGC
that para No.8 generally Gujarat High Court allowed 10% increase by
way of appreciation of land. While Special LAQ Officer has
considered Rs.35/- per sq. mt. Considering the said judgment
notification of the said case under act 4 & under Act 6 were in
year 1986 & 1987 respectively. In 1995 high court has considered
Rs.50/- per sq. mt. Of the notification case of 1981. That appeal was
done by Govt. Considering the judgment and land acquisition act 23
provisions my opinion is that Rs.50/- per sq. mt. Rate is given in
1981, notification. Again considering the said aspect and making it
is a base line. Appreciation of land per year @ 10% comes to Rs.5/-
under the said case rate per sq. mt. Comes to Rs.63/- compensation
will be appropriate.

The
Special Land Acquisition Officer has considered only Rs.35% per
square meter. Therefore the Reference Court has awarded additional
compensation as per the 10% increase by way of appreciation of land.
Learned Advocate for the appellant is unable to point out anything to
take a different view of the matter. Hence there is no substance in
the appeal and hence it deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly the
appeal is dismissed.

[K.S.

JHAVERI, J.]

ar

   

Top