Gujarat High Court
Deputy Collector And Land Acquisition ... vs Heirs Of Deceased Raghv Dharamshi on 15 January, 2026
Author: A.Y. Kogje
Bench: A.Y. Kogje
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4632/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/01/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4632 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2360 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2361 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2362 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4627 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4626 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4628 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5797 of 2019
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4489 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4621 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4622 of 2018
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2018
In
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4622 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4623 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4624 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4625 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4629 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4630 of 2018
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2018
In
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4630 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4631 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4633 of 2018
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2018
In
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4633 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4634 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 417 of 2019
With
Page 1 of 10
Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Jan 21 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 20:32:21 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/4632/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/01/2026
undefined
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1644 of 2020
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1645 of 2020
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 10 of 2023
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4909 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4510 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 4511 of 2018
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 192 of 2019
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1837 of 2020
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1657 of 2020
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2018
In
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1657 of 2020
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE Sd/-
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA Sd/-
=======================================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
=======================================================================
DEPUTY COLLECTOR AND LAND ACQUISITION AND REHABILITATION (IRRIGATION),
RAJKOT & ORS.
Versus
HEIRS OF DECEASED RAGHV DHARAMSHI & ORS.
=======================================================================
Appearance:
MR SHIVAM DIXIT and MS POOJA CHAUDHARY, AGPs for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR NITIN M AMIN(126) for the Defendant(s) No. 1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5,1.6,1.7
MR SANJAY M AMIN(130) for the Defendant(s) No. 1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5,1.6,1.7,2
=======================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA
Date : 15/01/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE) Page 2 of 10 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Jan 21 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 20:32:21 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4632/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/01/2026 undefined
1. These appeals are preferred under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 read with Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code against the common judgment and decree dated 17.01.2017 passed by the 12th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bhavnagar in Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos.75 to 92 of 2002, having main Land Acquisition Reference No.75 of 2002, whereby group of land acquisition reference cases filed by the claimants, came to be partly allowed.
2. The brief facts of the case as appears from the main Land Acquisition Reference No.75 of 2002 is that the lands situated at Village Kaniyad, Taluka Botad, District Bhavnagar were acquired for the purpose of Kaniyaad Irrigation Scheme. The State Government sanctioned the scheme and Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has been published on 12.06.1997 and the Notification under Section 6 of the Act has been published on 30.10.1997. Thereafter, the Special Land Acquisition Officer has passed award dated 24.09.1999 in LAQ No.25 of 1996 wherein the claimants were awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 3.50 per sq. mtr. for the Jirayat land and Rs. 5.25 per sq. mtr. for the Bagayat land. Being aggrieved by the same, the claimants have Page 3 of 10 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Jan 21 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 20:32:21 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4632/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/01/2026 undefined challenged the award by way of Land Acquisition Reference No.75 to 92 of 2002 before the 12 th Additional Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bhavnagar wherein the Reference Court has awarded additional compensation at the rate of Rs. 40.25 per sq. mtr. for Jirayat land and Rs. 54.43 per sq. mtr. for Bagayat land alongwith the solatium with the interest at the rate of 15% till the realisation and other incidental reliefs thereto.
3. At the outset, Learned Advocate for both the sides prayed that these group of appeals be taken on priority as cognate appeals are already decided. In this regard, Learned AGP for the appellant-State and learned Advocate for the claimants drew attention of the Court to judgment and decree dated 1 2 . 0 9 . 2 0 2 5 passed by this Court in First Appeal No.2616 of 2018 and allied matters and to the judgment and decree dated 08.01.2026 passed by this Court in First Appeal No.2288 of 2018 and allied matters and submitted that the present group of appeals arose from the acquisition proceedings arising from the same village and therefore, similar order is required to be passed in the present appeals also.
4. Having heard Learned Advocates for the parties Page 4 of 10 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Jan 21 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 20:32:21 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4632/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/01/2026 undefined and having perused the documents on record, it appears that the present appeals stand on an identical footing with the aforesaid group and nothing appears on record so as to take a different view.
5. In this regard, reference may be made to the judgment of a coordinate bench of this Court dated 12.09.2025 being First Appeal No.2616 of 2018 and allied matters wherein this Court had considered the correctness of enhancement of compensation granted by the Reference Court in group of appeals arising out of Land Acquisition Reference No.34 of 2002 and allied matters. Notification under Section 4 of Land Acquisition Act was published on 12.06.1997 and notification under Section 6 was published on 30.10.1997 wherein the Land Acquisition Officer passed the award on 24.09.1999 determining the market value at Rs.3.50 per sq. mtr. for Jirayat land and Rs.5.25 per sq. mtr. for Bagayat land. Being dissatisfied by the same, the claimants sought reference under Section 18 of the Act, which came to be registered as LAR No.34 of 2002 and allied matters. 5.1. The Reference Court in its judgment dated 17.01.2017 in LAR No.34 of 2002 and allied matters by adopting the yield method, assessed the annual Page 5 of 10 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Jan 21 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 20:32:21 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4632/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/01/2026 undefined agricultural income on the basis of crop yield with reference to oral evidence, 7/12 extracts and APMC price lists, and thereafter by applying 50% deduction towards cultivation expenses and multiplier of 10%, partly allowed the references and enhanced the market value of the compensation granted by Rs.40.25 per sq. mtr. for Jirayat land and Rs.54.43 per sq. mtr. for Bagayat land, thereby fixing the total compensation at Rs.43.75 per sq. mtr. for Jirayat land and Rs.59.68 per sq. mtr. for Bagayat land. 5.2. In appeal, this Court noted that the present group of appeals were identical to the judgment and decree dated 12.09.2025, passed by a coordinate bench of this Court in First Appeal No.2625 of 2018 and allied matters and relied upon the same reasoning. In para-15 of the said judgment, the Court has observed as under:
"15. The learned Judge, therefore, considered Exhibits 49 to 51 and calculated the quantity of the crops and thereafter, derived the value of the crops and applied 50% deduction towards the expenses and allowed the multiplier of 10. Applying the said method, the additional compensation at Rs.40.25/- per sq. mtr. and total compensation at Rs.43.75/- per sq. mtr. for Jirayat land was determined. While for Bagayat land, the learned Judge allowed additional Page 6 of 10 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Jan 21 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 20:32:21 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4632/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/01/2026 undefined compensation of Rs.54.43/- per sq. mtr. and the total compensation awarded was Rs.59.68/- per sq. mtr."
This Court in the said judgment, has also relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Indian Oil Corporation Siddhpur vs. Patel Khushalbhai Joitaram & Another reported in 2002 (1) G.L.H. 423 and affirmed that the Reference Court had correctly applied the yield method and held that valuation based on agricultural yield, even involving a degree of guess work is permissible.
5.3. The aforesaid reasoning in First Appeal No.2625 of 2018 and allied matters has been adopted by this Court in First Appeal No.2616 of 2018 and allied matters, and it has been observed as under:-
"5. The Division Bench was of the opinion that while determining the compensation certain degree of guess work would be permissible and it further held that the learned Judge has rightly adopted the yield method in view of the principle laid down by this Court in the case of Indian Oil Corporation, Siddhpur vs. Patel Khushalbhai Joitram (supra) and that no error has been committed in awarding the additional amount of compensation. Hence, there is no Page 7 of 10 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Jan 21 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 20:32:21 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4632/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/01/2026 undefined reason available to this Court not to apply the reasoning to the present group as well.
6. In the case on hand, the learned Judge, has adopted the yield method inasmuch as, there was no evidence produced substantiating the sale instances and in absence of any evidence, the yield method was correctly adopted keeping in forefront the nature of crops, irrigation facilities, etc. Moreover, permissible deduction of 50% and addition of multiplier of 10 were rightly pressed in service and hence, this Court is of the view that the impugned judgment does not warrant any interference. The additional compensation has been rightly determined at the rate of Rs.43.75/- per sq. mtr for Jirayat Land and at the rate of Rs.59.68/- per sq. mtr. for Bagayat Land."
6. The Court has also referred to the judgment and decree of this court dated 08.01.2026 in First Appeal No.2288 of 2018 and allied matters, wherein it was observed that the appeals were left out inadvertently from the earlier group of appeals being First Appeal No.2616 of 2018 and allied matters, and has reaffirmed the yield method and confirmed the compensation granted by the Reference Court in the common judgment dated 17.01.2017 in LAR Nos.34 of 2002 and allied references, and has held as under:-
Page 8 of 10 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Jan 21 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 20:32:21 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4632/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/01/2026 undefined "6.The Court having perused the impugned judgment and decree and the justification having been given in the preceding paras, the Court hereby confirms the award of the Reference Court dated 17.01.2017, whereby the valuation of the land for the purpose of compensation decided for non-irrigated land being at the rate of Rs.43.75 per square meter and Rs.59.68 per square meter for irrigated land, is hereby upheld. The appeals therefore, stand disposed of and impugned judgment and decree is hereby upheld. Decree to be drawn accordingly."
7. Moreover, it appears that the aforesaid judgments of this Court in First Appeal No.2625 of 2018 and allied matters, First Appeal No.2616 of 2018 and allied matters, and First Appeal No.2288 of 2018 and allied matters which have settled the issue, have not been challenged before the Apex Court and appear to have been accepted and therefore, there appears to be no reason so as to take a different view.
8. In view of the reasoning in the aforesaid judgments and the fact that the present Appeals arose out of the acquisition proceedings from the same village, there appears to be no reason so as to take a different view and Page 9 of 10 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Jan 21 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 20:32:21 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/4632/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/01/2026 undefined therefore, the impugned common judgment and decree dated 17.01.2017 passed by the 12 th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bhavnagar in Land Acquisition Reference Nos.75 to 92 of 2002 warrants no interference. The appeals stand disposed of. Decree be drawn accordingly.
9. In view of the order passed in the main appeals, Civil Applications do not survive. Disposed of accordingly.
10. R&P be sent back to the concerned Reference Court.
Sd/-
(A.Y. KOGJE, J) Sd/-
(J. L. ODEDRA, J) SHITOLE Page 10 of 10 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Jan 21 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 20:32:21 IST 2026