Vaghela Dhanji Viramji Since Decd ... vs Special Land Acquisition Officer
2021 Latest Caselaw 6184 Guj

       C/FA/1386/2020                             ORDER DATED: 17/06/2021




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
                     R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1386 of 2020
==========================================================
       VAGHELA DHANJI VIRAMJI SINCE DECD THROUGH HIS HEIRS
                              Versus
                SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR AV PRAJAPATI(672) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,1.1,1.2,1.3
for the Defendant(s) No. 2
MR. TIRTHRAJ PANDYA, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER(1) for the
Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA

                             Date : 17/06/2021

                              ORAL ORDER

The appellant original claimant has preferred this First Appeal against judgment and award passed in common Land References cases Nos. 204 of 2002 to 216 of 2002 delivered by learned 3 rd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Palanpur, District Banaskantha, in so far as it concerns judgment and award in Land Reference case No. 209 of 2002. Thereby the Reference Court granted additional compensation.

2. In this appeal, the claimants have prayed for further enhancement in the awarded amount on the various grounds raised in the memorandum of appeal.

3. Learned advocate Mr. Ashok Prajapati stated and submitted that co-ordinate Bench decided the First Appeal No. 824 of 2020 in Rabari Kumbha Dungar since deceased through his heirs vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, which concerns the judgment and award in Reference case No. 215 of 2002 arising out of the same common judgment and award of the Reference court.

C/FA/1386/2020 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2021

4. It was submitted that in Rabari Kumbha Dungar (supra) co- ordinate Bench relied on the judgment dated 22.8.2017 of the Division Bench in First Appeal No. 886 of 2017 to First Appeal No. 890 of 2017 which were decided in allied reference cases. The appellants - the claimants therein were held entitled to Rs. 69.10 per sq.mtr., totalling Rs. 95.40 per sq. mtr. It was submitted that the said decision of the co- ordinate Bench would apply in the present case, since the judgment and award is common.

4.1 Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Tirthraj Pandya could not dispute the above position.

5. In Rabari Kumbha Dungar (supra), the co-ordinate Bench has relied on the judgment of the Division Bench dated 22.8.2017 reproducing the same in its entirety. The following relevant portions from the judgment of the Division Bench are reproduced to be the part of the reasonings of this appeal,

"6. Having heard learned advocates on either side and having perused the impugned judgment it imminently appears that Section 4 Notification in respect of the lands of the appellants was issued on 06.05.1999. Likewise, Notification in respect of land of Village-Radka was issued on 12.03.2014 while in respect of lands of village-Nagla was issued on 18.02.1999. Thus, it is vividly clear that Section 4 Notification in respect of the lands of village-Radka, village-Nagla and village-Jandla were issued in the same year, of-course, on different dates. Moreover, all these three villages are situated in the same Taluka i.e. Tharad. The appellants in support of the Reference had relied upon the judgment and award in LAR Case No.75 of 2002 and LAR Case No.76 of 2002 in respect of village-Nagla while the respondent relied upon the judgment and award in respect of village-Radka. The learned Reference Court has chosen to rely on the award in respect of village-Radka in preference to the award in case of village-Nagla.

C/FA/1386/2020 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2021

7. A singular question which requires consideration in this clutch of appeals is whether the Reference Court was justified in relying upon the award in respect of village-Radka over the award in respect of village- Nagla.

8. It appears that the Reference Court is impressed and swayed away by the fact that the judgment and award in LAR Case No.286 of 2002 to 290 of 2002 in respect of village-Radka had been accepted by the Government and the acquired land of the appellants and the village-Radka both are in the same Taluka i.e. Tharad.

9. In our considered view, the reasoning adopted by the Reference Court for relying upon the award in respect of village-Radka over the award in respect of village-Nagla is erroneous. It is undisputed fact that village- Radka and village-Nagla are in the same Taluka i.e. Tharad. Village-Radka is situated 25 kilometers away from the acquired lands while village-Nagla is situated 10 kilometers away from the acquired land. These fine distinction is ignored by the Reference Court.

10. At this juncture, they could not be out of place to mention that the judgment and award rendered by the Reference Court in LAR No.75 of 2002 and 76 of 2002 in respect of village-Nagla was challenged by the Government in this Court by filing First Appeal No.1332 of 2014 and First Appeal No.133 of 2014. This Court by order dated 09.05.2014 dismissed the appeals. Consequent upon the dismissal of the appeals, the Government by communication dated 07.12.2015 has decided to accept the judgment and award rendered by the Reference Court in respect of land of village- Nagla.

11.The perusal of the judgment and award in respect of village Nagla reveals that the land owners were awarded Rs.3.25/- per sq. meter for irrigated land and Rs.2.50/- per sq. meter for non-irrigated land. The Reference Court by its judgment and order dated 25.07.2013 after considering various factors came to the conclusion that the appropriate price of acquired land was Rs.95.40/- instead of Rs.3.25/- per sq. meter for irrigated land and Rs.2.60 per sq. meter for non-irrigated land. Accordingly, the land owners were entitled to additional compensation after deducting the compensation warded by the Land Acquisition Officer. The judgment and order of the Reference Court as attain the finality as the appeal has failed and the Government vide communication dated 07.12.2015 has accepted the judgment and order of the Reference Court. We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that looking to the approximity of the land acquired under the impugned judgment and order of the land of village-Nagla, (the appellants are also entitled to the compensation as was awarded in respect of village-Nagla). Under the circumstances, we are persuaded to enhance the compensation awarded to the appellants to bring it in tune with the compensation awarded in respect of village-Nagla. And accordingly, the price of the land was of the appellant should be Rs.95.40/-, and therefore,

C/FA/1386/2020 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2021

the appellants are entitled to the compensation at the rate of Rs.95.5/- per sq. meter in place of Rs.23.30/- as determined by the Reference Court. Accordingly, we hold that the appellants are entitled to Rs.95.40 per squire meter for their acquired land in place of Rs.26.30/- which is awarded by the Reference Court. Accordingly, the appellants are entitled to Rs.95.40-Rs.26.30/- = Rs.69.10/- as additional compensation.

12. The submission of Mr. Soni, learned AGP that the appellants were indolent in preferring the appeals inasmuch as the appeals are preferred after four years of the impugned award, and therefore, this Court may not award interest on the additional compensation has substantial force in our opinion. The appeals for inexplicable reasons slept over the matter for four long years, and therefore, if the interest is awarded on the additional compensation, in our view, it would amount to giving premium to the appellants, and therefore, we deem it in the interest of justice to award additional compensation to the appellants without interest.

13. For the foregoing reasons, these appeals succeed in part, the impugned judgment and award dated 15.03.2014 passed in LAR Case No. 204 of 2002 and allied References under Section 18 of the Act is hereby modified and the appellants are held entitled to Rs.95.40-Rs.26.30/- = Rs.69.10/- as additional compensation.

14. However, the appellants shall be entitled to interest on the additional amount of compensation only up to 09.03.2007 as they were indolent in approaching this Court after huge delay of 771 days.

15. Parties are left to bare their own costs."

5.1 The operative portion of Rabari Kumbha Dungar (supra) reads as under,

"5. Since the Reference of the appellants herein was decided by the Reference Court vide common judgment and order and against the said decision, the claimants of other References have preferred First Appeals which have been partly allowed by the Division Bench of this Court as referred above, I am of the opinion that the said judgment of the Division Bench squarely applies to the present appeal also and hence, the present appeal stands partly allowed as per the decision rendered by the Division Bench in First Appeal Nos.886 to 890 of 2017."

5.2 The present First Appeal is required to be allowed in the above terms. The claimants are entitled to the enhanced compensation as per the decision rendered by the Division Bench in First Appeal No. 886 of 2017 to First Appeal No. 890 of 2017 aforementioned.

C/FA/1386/2020 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2021

6. The impugned judgment and award dated 25.3.2014 in so far as it relates to the Land Reference Case No. 209 of 2002 decided in common alongwith other Land Reference cases, shall stand modified in terms of the above.

7. The appeal is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

(N.V.ANJARIA, J) C.M. JOSHI