Oil And Natural Gas Corporation Limited vs Patel Joitabhai Mulchanddas

Gujarat High Court

Oil And Natural Gas Corporation Limited vs Patel Joitabhai Mulchanddas on 25 July, 2025

                                                                                                             NEUTRAL CITATION




                             C/FA/2587/2008                                JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025

                                                                                                             undefined




                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                                              R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2587 of 2008


                        FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


                        HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK

                        =======================================
                               Approved for Reporting           Yes     No
                                                                        No
                        =======================================
                                OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LIMITED
                                                    Versus
                                   PATEL JOITABHAI MULCHANDDAS & ANR.
                        =======================================
                        Appearance:
                        MR AJAY R MEHTA(453) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
                        MS AGNEYA MANKAD AGP for the Defendant(s) No. 2
                        MR AV PRAJAPATI(672) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
                        =======================================

                          CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
                                PRACHCHHAK

                                                       Date : 25/07/2025

                                                       ORAL JUDGMENT

1. This appeal has been filed against the judgment and award dated 22.10.2007 passed by the learned 9 th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mehsana, (hereinafter referred to as the "Reference Court") in Land Acquisition Reference Case No.323 of 2003 whereby the Reference was partly allowed and the present Page 1 of 6 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Tue Jul 29 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 00:27:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2587/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025 undefined appellant - O.N.G.C. was held liable to pay additional amount of compensation to the original claimant along with interest and costs. Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short "the Act") in respect of the lands under acquisition situated at Village: Santhal, Taluka & District :

Mehsana was issued on 18.02.1998 for the public purpose i.e. Distribution centre for Institute Combi Plan (Santhal main) and notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 28.12.1998 and thereafter, the notice under Section 9 of the Act issued to the claimant and the Special Land Acquisition Officer passed an award under Section 11 of the Act whereby awarded Rs.7.00 per square meters.

3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, the claimant approached the Reference Court by filing the aforesaid Reference Case, whereby the Reference Court has partly allowed the Reference and awarded an additional amount of Rs.57.00 per square meters over and above the amount awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer along with the consequential benefits likewise interest, solatium etc. as provided under the statute vide judgment and award.

4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award passed by the Reference Court, the appellant has preferred this appeal.

NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2587/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025 undefined

5. Heard Mr.Ajay Mehta for the appellant, Mr.A. V. Prajapati, learned counsel for respondent - claimant and Ms.Agneya Mankad, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent No.2 at length and perused the material placed on record.

6. Mr.Mehta, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted the same facts which are narrated in the memo of appeal and has submitted that the Reference Court has committed an error in passing the impugned judgment and award and in awarding additional compensation in addition to the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. He has submitted that the comparison of the land with the adjoining village and on the basis thereof, the assessment has been made addition 10% is erroneous. He has submitted that the lands acquired in respect of the lands of Village: Kasalpur for the public purpose and the lands acquired of Village: Santhal referred in Land Acquisition Reference Nos. 3226 to 3229 of 2003 and 3590 to 3592 of 2003 cannot be considered as comparable, therefore, the Reference Court has erroneously discussed and relied upon such previous award. He has submitted that the Reference Court ought not to have awarded Rs. 57.00 per square meters over and above the award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. He has submitted that the Reference Court has committed an error in awarding additional compensation and, therefore, the interference is required to be called for and appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned judgment and award deserves to be modified to the extent. He has referred to Page 3 of 6 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Tue Jul 29 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 00:27:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2587/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025 undefined the judgment of this Court dated 16.07.2025 passed in First Appeal Nos.2798 of 2008 with 2799 of 2008 and has submitted that the same compensation be awarded in this appeal.

7. Mr.Prajapati, learned counsel for the respondents - claimants has submitted that the Reference Court has not committed any error of facts and law in awarding compensation in addition to the award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. He has submitted that the Reference Court has considered the relevant aspects and also relied upon the previous award in case of land of Village: Santhal and Village:

Santhal and Village: Kasalpur are adjoining villages and, therefore, reliance placed upon the previous award is just and proper. He has submitted that when the land of agriculturist is acquired, he is required to pay adequate compensation. He has submitted that the Reference Court has not committed any error of law and facts in passing the impugned judgment and award and in awarding additional compensation over and over the award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. He has submitted that no interference is required to be called for in the present case and the appeal being meritless deserves to be dismissed.

8. In view of the rival submissions, it is required to be considered whether the present first appeal can be entertained or not.

NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2587/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025 undefined

9. As it is evident from the material and evidence and the observations in the impugned award of the Reference Court, there is no doubt that the Reference Court has relied upon the previous award in Land Acquisition Reference No.3226 to 3229 of 2003 and 3590 to 3592 of 2003. It is well accepted that the relevant criteria for deciding such market value is nature of land, situation of land, yield and prospect for potential development. The Hon'ble Apex Court in case of General Manager, Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Limited Vs. Rameshbhai Jivanbhai Patel & Anr., reported in (2008) 14 SCC 745 has clearly observed that increase in the land prices depends upon the various factor, which have been discussed in the said judgment.

10. Reliance placed on the previous award has been material and the litigation before this Hon'ble Court and, therefore, it could not have been followed. Further, there is another judgment of this Court delivered in First Appeal No.5621/2008 dated 23.12.2010 (Coram : K.S. Jhaveri, J.), wherein it has considered the acquisition of the land of Village : Jotana of Mehsana Taluka, which is adjoining village. This Court, after considering the judgment of the Reference Court, which has been referred in the said judgment, has accepted the market value of the land in that case at Rs.44.00 per square meter. In the facts of the present case, the Reference Court has taken the market value and awarded additional compensation at the rate of Rs.50.00 and after considering the amount, which has been awarded, it has Page 5 of 6 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Tue Jul 29 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 00:27:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2587/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025 undefined been rounded off Rs.57.00. Therefore, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and also the judgment of the Reference Court in other cases as well as the judgment of this Court as referred to hereinabove, the market value can be taken at Rs.44 and the claimant would be entitled to additional compensation at the rate of Rs.44.

11. In the circumstances, the impugned judgment and award passed by the by the learned 9 th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mehsana in Land Acquisition Reference Case No.323 of 2003 dated 22.10.2007 is hereby modified to the extent that instead of compensation at the rate of Rs.57/- per square meters, the original claimant is entitled to Rs.44/- per square meters over and above the amount of compensation already awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. It is also clarified that the claimant would be entitled to other statutory benefits under the law. Accordingly, the present appeal stands allow in part to the aforesaid extend. The rest of the award is not disturbed. Registry is directed to transmit back the record and proceedings to the concerned Court forthwith.

(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J) V.R. PANCHAL Page 6 of 6 Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Tue Jul 29 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 00:27:16 IST 2025