Gujarat High Court
General Manager vs Patel Nathubhai Savabhai Decd.Through ... on 26 June, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3011/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3011 of 2008
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3012 of 2008
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3013 of 2008
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3014 of 2008
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3015 of 2008
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3016 of 2008
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3017 of 2008
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Sd/-
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
GENERAL MANAGER
Versus
PATEL NATHUBHAI SAVABHAI DECD.THROUGH THE LRS & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MOSON LE EXPARTS(11071) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR AKSHAT KHARE(5912) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
DEVANSHIBA RANA AGP for the Defendant(s) No. 2
MR AV PRAJAPATI for the Defendant(s) No.1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
Date : 26/06/2025
COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT
1. All these appeals involve common questions on law and facts and therefore, they are disposed of by this common Page 1 of 7 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Jul 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 11 22:17:48 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3011/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025 undefined judgment.
2. These appeals have been filed against the common judgment and award dated 25.01.2008 passed by the learned Additional District Judge & P.O. F.T.C. No.3 Mehsana, (hereinafter referred to as the "Reference Court") in Land Acquisition Reference Nos.958 to 964 of 2005, whereby the References were partly allowed and the present appellant - O.N.G.C. was held liable to pay additional amount of compensation to the original claimants along with interest and costs.
3. The facts in brief are that the competent authority under the Land Acquisition Act made a proposal for permanent acquisition of the lands situated at village Deloli belonging to the respondents-original claimants. In present case notification under Section 4 was published by the Competent Authority under the Act on 27.01.2000. After following due procedure, the lands came to be acquired. Award came to be passed by the competent authority fixing the amount of compensation. Page 2 of 7 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Jul 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 11 22:17:48 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3011/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025 undefined 3.1. However, being dissatisfied with the award, the original claimants raised dispute, by way of references. The Reference Court partly allowed the same by way of the impugned judgment and awarded Rs.45.00 per sq. mtr. Hence, these appeals.
4. Heard Mr. Khare, learned advocate for the appellant and Mr. Prajapati, learned advocate for the claimants and Devenshiba Rana for respondent No.2.
5. Mr.Akshat Khare, learned Counsel for the appellant- ONGC, has submitted that the Reference Court has erred in coming to the conclusion that the original claimants would be entitled to additional compensation at the rate of Rs.45/- per sq. mtr. over and above Rs.14/- per sq. mtr. awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. Learned advocate for the appellant further submitted that the Reference Court ought to have held that the Land Acquisition Officer has rightly awarded the compensation. 5.1 Learned advocate for the appellant has also submitted Page 3 of 7 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Jul 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 11 22:17:48 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3011/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025 undefined that the judgment and award passed by the Reference Court is not based on any cogent and reliable evidence. It is also submitted that the Reference Court has committed error in relying upon the award passed by the Reference Court in some other LAR cases of some other village without comparing similarity between the land as to the fertility, productivity and other development in the surrounding areas and therefore, the impugned judgment and awards passed by the Reference Court deserve interference by this Court.
5.2 Mr. Khare, learned Advocate for the appellant has relied upon the map which shows the distance between Deloli and Balol and distance between Deloli and Gamanpura and the order passed by this Court in respect of village Gamanpura.
5.3 Learned advocate for the appellant urges before the Court that present appeals may be allowed and the impugned judgment and award passed by the Reference Court may be quashed and set aside.
Page 4 of 7 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Jul 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 11 22:17:48 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3011/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025 undefined
6. On the other hand, Mr. A.V. Prajapati, learned Advocate for the respondents has submitted that the Reference Court after perusing the evidence on record passed the award and therefore, the award of the Reference Court is just and proper and no interference is called for. Mr. Prajapati, learned Advocate, has also submitted that the Reference Court has not committed any error in passing the impugned judgment and award. 6.1 Mr. Prajapati, learned Advocate, has submitted that considering the facts of the case and after going through all the relevant documents and material produced before the Reference Court, the Reference Court has passed the impugned judgment and award which is just and proper and this Court may not interfere in present appeals and impugned judgment and award passed by the Reference Court may be confirmed.
7. I have gone through the record of the appeals and relevant documents. I have also examined the record and proceedings.
Page 5 of 7 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Jul 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 11 22:17:48 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3011/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025 undefined
8. From the plain reading of the judgment of this Court dated 29.08.2011 passed in First Appeal Nos. 2794 of 2008 to 2797 of 2008 for village Gamanpura, it is clear that the present First Appeals relate to the village Deloli, which is adjacent to village Gamanpura and this Court has already decided the market value of the said village and therefore, it will be appropriate, to dispose of all these appeals on the same terms. In the said adjoining village Gamanpura, this Court has already considered the market value @ Rs.36/- per sq. mtr. as on Section-4 Notification dated 25.4.1997 and therefore, in present appeals, same market value is required to be awarded.
10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of decision of this Court in First Appeal No. 2794 to 2797 of 2008, I am of the opinion that the compensation awarded by the Reference Court in the above First Appeals is required to be considered as best example.
11. In the decision in case of Gamanpura, relied upon by Page 6 of 7 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Jul 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 11 22:17:48 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/3011/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025 undefined learned advocate for the appellant, Notification under Section 4 was published on 25.04.1997 and this Court awarded Rs.36/- per sq. mtr. whereas in present case, Notification under Section 4 of the Act was published on 27.01.2000 and therefore, by giving 10% price adjustment for 2 years and 9 months, the market rate value would come to Rs. 45.90 per sq. mtr.. Since, the Reference Court has already awarded Rs.45.00 per sq. mtr., no interference is required to be called for in present First Appeals.
12. In view of the above, present appeals are devoid of any merits and the same are hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.
Sd/-
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J) SURESH SOLANKI Page 7 of 7 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Jul 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 11 22:17:48 IST 2025