Deputy Collector & Land ... vs Shantaben Wd/O Shanabhai Sangod ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 18157 Guj

      C/FA/3223/2012                               JUDGMENT DATED: 07/12/2021




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                       R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3223 of 2012


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA                            Sd/-

and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT                       Sd/-

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

1     Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed                   NO
      to see the judgment ?

2     To be referred to the Reporter or not ?                            NO

3     Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy                  NO
      of the judgment ?

4     Whether this case involves a substantial question                  NO
      of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
      of India or any order made thereunder ?

==========================================================
     DEPUTY COLLECTOR & LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER & 2 other(s)
                            Versus
     SHANTABEN WD/O SHANABHAI SANGOD SINCE DECE. THRO' L/H.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MANAN MEHTA, AGP for the Appellants
MR VIJAY N RAVAL(2025) for the Defendants
==========================================================

    CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
          and
          HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT

                               Date : 07/12/2021

                     ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT)

1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the appellant State has preferred the above referred appeals against the judgment and

C/FA/3223/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/12/2021

award dated 21.6.2010 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Godhra at Panchmahals, in the Land Acquisition Reference Cases No.450 of 2008, awarding the additional compensation of Rs.450/- per Sq.Mtr. to the respondents herein.

2. By the impugned common judgment passed in the Land Acquisition Reference Case No.451 of 2008, the Reference Court, in paras 12, 13 and 14, observed, as under :

"12. I have heard both the parties and I have also considered the records on hand. It is the case of the claimants that the lands acquired by the Land Acquisition Officer in present reference applications are fertile lands and it is situated at village Vavdibujarg on Vadodara Godhra Dahod Indore highway and it is hardly at a distance of 2 Kms. from Godhra city which is the headquarter of Panchmahal District. As per the submissions of the claimants the lands were fertile and they were taking 3 crops annually and thereby earning Rs.2,00,000/ p.a after deducting all the agricultural expenses. It also transpires from the deposition of the claimant that the lands of L.A.R. No. 52/03 and their lands were of the same village, situated adjacent to each other. It transpires from the copy of the judgment of L.A.R. No. 52/03, of Ex. 16 that the Learned Judge had placed reliance upon the report of the Govt. Approved Land Valuer and it transpires that the land valuation is made on the basis of sales of surrounding lands, income capitalization method and the benefit of locality and future are' developments and has assessed the market value of the land as Rs.307/ per sq. mtr. as on Year2000.

It also transpires from the deposition of the claimant that

C/FA/3223/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/12/2021

the acquired lands are on the highway road, village Vavdi is in continuation of the Godhra city and would definitely attract the benefit of developed locality.

13. In the present references, the claimant has deposed in his affidavit that they used to take 3 crops annually and had a annual net income of Rs.2,00,000/- and Rs.10000-20000/- p.a. from animal husbandry, but the claimants have failed to produce any cogent evidence in respect of their income and irrigation facilities available to them for the purpose of agriculture. The Ld. D.G.P. for the opponents has cross-examined the claimant, wherein it is admitted by him that 50% of their income is spent towards agricultural developments, fertilizers, seeds, etc. It is also admitted by him that the agricultural production is uncertain. Moreover, the claimants have failed to furnish any evidence to prove their agricultural production and irrigation facilities available to them. Under these circumstances the compensation at the rate of Rs.800/- claimed by them is very high, and I am of the opinion that the claimants are not entitled for such huge amount.

14. However, there is no any dispute or any objection raised by the opponent regarding the present lands situated near the lands of L.A.R. No. 52/03, which are of the same village and that it is in continuity t o the Godhracity, which is the headquarter of Panchmahals District and therefore, I am of the opinion that reliance can be definitely placed upon the said judgment and the present claimants are entitled to get compensation accordingly. Moreover, I do agree with the arguments of the Ld. Advocate, Shri J.R. Raval, for the

C/FA/3223/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/12/2021

claimants that the referred lands were acquired in the year2000, whereas the lands under the present references are acquired in the year 2006 and it is quite obvious that the market value of the lands would be raised considerably during the said time period. There is no doubt that the market value of the real estate has raised by leaps and bounds during the recent times, however I am of the opinion that the price rise at the rate of 10% p.a., as per the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court, should be awarded to the claimants, for the period of six years. It transpires from the record on hand that the market value of the land in the year- 2000 had been assessed at Rs.307/- per sq. mtr. and price rise at the rate of 10% for the period of six years would amount to Rs. 184.20 and as such, the market value of the land at the of acquisition is assessed as Rs.491.20, i.e. Rs.491/- per sq. mtr. and the claimants were entitled to get compensation at the said rate. However, the Land Acquisition Officer had awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 27/- per sq. mtr. and as such, the claimants are entitled to get additional compensation at the rate of Rs. 464/- per sq. mtr. But, considering the uncertainity factor in the field of real estate development, I am of the opinion that the present claimants are entitled to get additional compensation at the rate of Rs.450/- per sq. mtr. Under these circumstances I am of the opinion that the L.A.O. has erred in arriving at just and appropriate market value of the acquired lands, and therefore, I answer the Issue No.l in Affirmative and I am of the opinion that the claimants are entitled to get additional compensation at the rate of Rs.450/- per sq. mtr. and solatium and interest thereupon...."

3. Here in the present case, the First Appeals Nos.1637 to 1641 of 2012 (five in number) were disposed off by this Court on 23.09.2019, whereas the

C/FA/3223/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/12/2021

total LARs decided by the Reference Court are six in number, i.e. the Land Acquisition Reference Cases Nos.446 to 451 of 2008. The present First Appeal against the judgment of the L.A.R No.450 of 2008 was not decided because this appeal is not listed before that Court at that time. Therefore, we have called for the papers of First Appeal Nos.1637 to 1641 of 2021 and perused the same for considering the facts of present appeal.

4. Mr. Manan Mehta, the learned AGP appearing for the appellant State mainly submitted that the Reference Court has not considered the evidence on record in its true letter and spirit and, therefore, it assessed the market value at a higher level and thereby awarded the additional compensation to the respondents herein. Learned AGP Mr. Mehta also submitted that there is difference in the fertility aspect of the land etc., even though, the same has not been considered by the Reference Court. Learned AGP Mr. Mehta submitted that earlier in the year 2009 in the LAR Cases Nos.49 to 58 of 2003, the market value was considered at Rs.307/- per Sq.Mtr. However, in these LARs, the market value has been considered at Rs.491/- per Sq.Mtr. by the Reference Court. Learned AGP Mr. Mehta, therefore, prays that there being merit in these appeals, the same be allowed.

5. As against this, Mr. Vijay N. Raval, the learned advocate for the respondents, has submitted that the Reference Court has considered the market value of the Land Acquisition Reference Case No.52 of 2003, wherein the market value has been decided at Rs.307/- per Sq.Mtr. for the same village VavdiBujarg. He submitted that the Reference Court considered both, the year in which the market value considered at Rs.307/- per Sq.Mtr. as well as the year in which the present lands are acquired. Mr. Raval, learned advocate for the respondent further submitted that this Court has dismissed the First Appeals No.1637 of 2012 to 1641 of 2012 by upholding the common judgment and award passed for the adjoining lands. Lastly, he submitted that the judgment and award of the Reference Court is just and proper and does not require any interference by this Court and has prayed

C/FA/3223/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/12/2021

to dismiss the first appeals of the appellant.

6. It appears from the record that the appellant - State has acquired the lands of the respondents herein for the purpose of constructing Vadodara Godhra Dahod Bypass Road. The notification under Section 4 of the Act has been published in the Government Gazette on 31.8.2006 and the notification under Section 6 of the Act has been published in the Government Gazette on 8.3.2007. Thereafter, the notice had been served to the interested persons and an opportunity had been offered for hearing. Thereafter, the Dy. Collector and Land Acquisition Officer, Godhra, delivered the award being the Award No.11 of 2005 and granted Rs.2,70,000/- compensation per hectare, i.e. Rs.27/- per Sq.Mtr. to the original claimants. Thereafter, the original claimants, i.e. the respondents herein, had instituted the Land Acquisition Reference Cases Nos.446 to 451 of 2008 before the Reference Court and prayed for compensation at the rate of Rs.800/- per Sq.Mtr. The Reference Court considered the Land Acquisition Reference Case No.451 of 2008 as the lead matter in the above mentioned group of LARs. Before the Reference Court, both the parties were heard and an opportunity had been granted to lead the evidence. The Reference Court decided the above mentioned LARs on 21.6.2010, wherein the additional compensation of Rs.450/- has been granted to the respondents herein, more particularly, on the basis of the market value of Rs.307/- per Sq.Mtr. which has been decided in the Land Acquisition Reference Case No.52 of 2003 for the same village, i.e. Vavdi Bujarg.

7. We have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for both the parties. It emerges from the arguments as well as the impugned judgment and award that the Reference Court has not granted the additional compensation in full as the respondents herein

C/FA/3223/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/12/2021

had prayed for Rs.800/- per Sq.Mtr. whereas the Reference Court has granted Rs.450/- per Sq.Mtr. as additional compensation and thereby partly allowed the claim of the original claimants respondents herein.

8. The Reference Court has mainly relied upon the judgment and award of the Land Acquisition Reference Case No.52 of 2003 decided for the same village, i.e. Vavdi Bujarg. In the Land Acquisition Reference Case No.52 of 2003, the reference Court considered the market value of village Vavdi Bujarg at Rs.307/- per Sq.Mtr. The Trial Court considered the market value of village Vavdi - Bujarg in the Land Acquisition Reference Case No.52 of 2003 for the year 2000; whereas, the present references are for the lands acquired in the year 2006 and, therefore, the Trial Court also considered rise in the market value at 10% per year and thereafter the Re f e r e n c e C o u r t a s s e s s e d t h e market value at Rs.491.20 ps., for the year 2006 in which the lands under reference are acquired for the same village. The Reference Court also deducted Rs.27/- awarded by the competent authority from the market value of the land at Rs.491/- per Sq.Mtr. and arrived at Rs.464/- per Sq.Mtr. The Reference Court also considered the aspect of uncertainty in the field of real estate development etc., and arrived at the conclusion that the original claimants are entitled to get Rs.450/- per Sq.Mtr. instead of Rs.464/- per Sq.Mtr., as the additional compensation.

9. In such circumstances referred to above and after going through the impugned judgment and award, it appears that the Reference Court has considered Rs.307/- per Sq.Mtr. for the same village Vavdi Bujarg, which has been considered in the Land Acquisition Reference Case No.52 of 2003 as comparable instance. In the case of the Land Acquisition Reference Case No.52 of 2003, the lands were acquired in the year 2000 whereas, the lands of the present original claimants have been were

C/FA/3223/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/12/2021

acquired in the year 2006 therefore, there must be a considerable rise in the market value within a period of six. The Trial Court, therefore, considered 10% rise in the market value of the land per year.

10. The judgment and award, which has been passed in the above mentioned Land Acquisition Reference Case No.52 of 2003 along with other LARs, has been challenged by the State by filing First Appeals Nos.25 to 35 of 2012 before this Court. The above mentioned First Appeals No.25 to 35 of 2012 (except the First Appeal No.27 of 2012) have been tagged with the group of First Appeals No.979 of 2013 and other allied matters and, therefore, they have been decided by this Court in earlier judgment dated 24.09.2019 itself as mentioned above and the appeals of the State against the above mentioned Land Acquisition Reference Case No.52 of 2003 has been dismissed. The judgment and award passed in the Land Acquisition Reference Case No.52 of 2003 is upheld and confirmed by this Court. Once the judgment and award of the Land Acquisition Reference Case No.52 of 2003 and Nos.446 to 451 of 2008 (except present LAR No.450 of 2008) is confirmed and upheld by this Court in earlier judgment dated 24.09.2019, then it can be said that the Reference Court has rightly and in a proper manner considered the judgment and award passed in the Land Acquisition Reference Case No.52 of 2003 as comparable instance, which is for the same village, i.e. Vavdi Bujarg. Moreover, this Court has confirmed the common judgment and award passed in LAR No.451 of 2008 and other matters in First Appeal Nos.1637 to 1641 of 2012 and therefore, this appeal deserved to be dismissed.

11. In view of the referred facts and circumstances, it can be said that the Reference Court has not erred in coming to the conclusion that the respondents herein are entitled for the additional compensation at the rate of Rs.450/- per Sq.Mtr. The Reference Court has considered the evidence led before it in a right manner and in a proper perspective and, therefore, the judgment and award is not required to be

C/FA/3223/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/12/2021

interfered with.

12. In the result, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. The judgment and award of the Reference Court in the above mentioned LAR No.450 of 2008 is upheld.

13. As there is no merit in the present appeal, the same deserves to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. The judgment and award of the Reference Court in the above-mentioned LAR is upheld.

13. Civil Application/Misc. Civil Application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly.

14. The issue regarding the apportionment of the compensation, if any, can be carried before the Reference Court.

Sd/-

(N.V.ANJARIA, J)

Sd/-

(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J) M.H. DAVE