Gujarat High Court
Project Manager vs Senma Somabhai Kalabhai,Since ... on 8 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3134/2005 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3134 of 2005
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3135 of 2005
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3136 of 2005
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Sd/-
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
PROJECT MANAGER
Versus
SENMA SOMABHAI KALABHAI,SINCE DECD.THRU HIS HEIRS & L.RS. &
ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KUNAN B NAIK(3210) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS ROSHNI PATEL AGP for the Defendant(s) No. 4
NOTICE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No.
2.1,2.2,2.3,2.4,2.5,2.6,2.7,2.8,2.9,3
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5,1.6,1.7,1.8
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
Date : 08/07/2025
COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Since the issues involve in all these appeals are identical and common in nature, all these appeal are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. Present appeals are filed by the appellant - Oil and Page 1 of 8 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Thu Jul 10 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Jul 10 21:42:06 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3134/2005 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/07/2025 undefined Natural Gas Corporation Limited against the judgment and award dated 30.06.1995 passed by the learned Dstrict Judge, Mehsana (hereinafter referred to as 'the Reference Court') in Land Acquisition References Nos. 285 of 1986, 286 of 1986 and 287 of 1986 whereby, the Reference Court partly allowed the Reference Cases filed by the original claimants.
3. It is the case of the appellant that present respondents had filed Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 285 of 1986, 286 of 1986 and 287 of 1986 before the Reference Court.
3.2 After hearing both the parties and after evaluating the evidence placed on record, the Reference Court passed an order dated 30.6.1995 in above mentioned Land Acquisition Reference Cases and directed that the respondents were entitled to recover from the appellant an additional amount of yearly rent at Rs.80.50 per acre (i.e.Rs.0.80/- Ps/Sq. mtr.) towards the rent fixed by O.N.G.C. from time to time with interest as specified. The Page 2 of 8 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Thu Jul 10 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Jul 10 21:42:06 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3134/2005 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/07/2025 undefined Reference Court has also directed that the respondents claimants were also entitled to get an additional amount of yearly rent @ Rs.0.80/- per Sq. mtr. over and above the monthly rent fixed by O.N.G.C. 3.3 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment and award passed by the Reference Court, the appellant O.N.G.C. has filed all these First Appeals under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act.
4. Heard learned advocate Mr. Kunal Naik, appearing for the appellant - ONGC and learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms.Roshni Patel, appearing for the respondent No.4. Though served other respondents have chosen not to appear before this Court.
5. Learned advocate Mr. Naik, appearing for the appellant ONGC, has submitted that the amount awarded by the Reference Court is on higher side and therefore, the same is required to be reduced. He has submitted that the Reference Court has not properly considered the facts of the present case and also not considered the fact Page 3 of 8 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Thu Jul 10 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Jul 10 21:42:06 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3134/2005 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/07/2025 undefined that it was not for permanent acquisition but, it was a temporary acquisition and therefore, the Reference Court has completely ignored this aspect while recording the findings and has not properly considered the submissions made on behalf of the appellant while passing the impugned judgment and award and has committed a serious error of law and on facts. He has further submitted that there was a huge delay in preferring the Reference before the Reference Court, however, the Reference Court has not properly appreciated the said aspect while passing the impugned judgment and award. 5.1 Learned advocate Mr. Naik, has referred and relied upon the decision of Division Bench of this Court rendered in case of Deputy General Manager vs. Bakaji Jivaji and Anr. in First Appeal No.1037 of 2009 decided on 12.02.2014, wherein, identical issue is involved. He has also referred and relied upon the decision of this Court rendered in case of Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. vs. Sankarji Hemani and Anr., reported in [2008] 2 GLR 1226 and one Page 4 of 8 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Thu Jul 10 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Jul 10 21:42:06 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3134/2005 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/07/2025 undefined another decision rendered in case of Dy. General Manager vs. Patel Anil Bachubhai and Anr., reported in [2008] 2 GLH 767 and submitted that in light of the above referred decisions, present appeal be remitted back to the Reference Court for fresh consideration. He has submitted the Reference Court has exceeded its jurisdiction by awarding compensation and interest thereon.
6. I have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and perused the material placed on record. It appears that the controversy raised in the present appeal is now not res integra in view of the two reported decisions relied upon by this Court in First Appeal No.1037 of 2009, wherein, it was specifically held that while considering the scope and ambit of Reference Court in a reference under section 35(3) of the Act that Collector or Reference Court has no jurisdiction to determine and decide the rental beyond the period of 3 years from the date of taking the possession. It was further held that the Reference Court also has no Page 5 of 8 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Thu Jul 10 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Jul 10 21:42:06 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3134/2005 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/07/2025 undefined jurisdiction to award mesne profits for the occupation and possession of the land beyond 3 years. It is further held that it has no jurisdiction to pass an order for restoring the possession of the land. It was further held that a dispute whether there is an extension of an implied contract/agreement or not also cannot be decided by Reference Court. After so holding the Division Bench of this Court has quashed and set aside the award determining the rental beyond the period of 3 years from the date of taking the possession and has remanded the matters to the Reference Court to decide the references afresh in accordance with law and on merits and to decide the rental considering the observations made in the aforesaid decisions.
7. In view of the above undisputed facts and the facts in the present appeals, where the case is similar and identical, the impugned the judgment and awards dated 30.06.1995 passed by the Reference Court in Land Acquisition References Nos. 285 of 1986, 286 of 1986 and 287 of 1986 are hereby quashed and set aside and the Page 6 of 8 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Thu Jul 10 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Jul 10 21:42:06 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3134/2005 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/07/2025 undefined matters are remanded back to the learned Reference Court to decide and dispose of the reference afresh in accordance with law and on merits and determine the rental and quantum of compensation for the period of 3 years from the date of taking the possession and considering the observations made in the aforesaid two decisions. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the ONGC to place on record the aforesaid two reported decisions cited in First Appeal No.1037 of 2009 by the Division Bench of this Court before the Reference Court for its kind consideration so that the reference on remand can be decided in light of the observations made in the aforesaid two decisions.
8. Present First Appeals are allowed to the aforesaid extent. In the facts and circumstances of the case, Registry is directed to return the Record and Proceedings of each case to the Reference Court immediately. 8.1 It is also to be noted that pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court, if, the appellant has deposited Page 7 of 8 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Thu Jul 10 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Jul 10 21:42:06 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3134/2005 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/07/2025 undefined the amount of compensation as per the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Reference Court [which is now set aside], and if the same is lying in the Nazir department, the same shall be continued to be invested in cumulative fixed deposit as ordered earlier subject to the ultimate outcome of the reference, when the matters are remanded back to the Reference Court and any amount of compensation that may be awarded by the Reference Court on remand, shall be appropriated from the said fixed deposit, subject to obtaining appropriate interim order by the higher Court/Forum.
Sd/-
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J) SURESH SOLANKI Page 8 of 8 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Thu Jul 10 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Jul 10 21:42:06 IST 2025