Special Land Acquisition Officer vs Bhailalbhai Joitaram Patel ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 8999 Guj

       C/FA/1696/2021                                     ORDER DATED: 11/10/2022




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
                      R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1696 of 2021
                                   With
                CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2021
                     In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1696 of 2021
==========================================================
                  SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
                                Versus
             BHAILALBHAI JOITARAM PATEL ABATED LH JOINED
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR BHARGAV PANDYA, AGP for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
for the Defendant(s) No. 1,3.1,3.2,3.3
DECEASED LITIGANT for the Defendant(s) No. 3
MR AKASH R PATEL(10822) for the Defendant(s) No. 1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,2
MR.PINANK J RAIYANI(10166) for the Defendant(s) No. 1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,2
==========================================================
     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
                      Date : 11/10/2022
                       ORAL ORDER

1. At the outset, learned advocate Mr.Pinank Raiyani appearing for the opponents-original claimants has submitted that the issue is squarely covered by the judgment dated 16.12.2021 passed in First Appeal No.1704 of 2021 and allied matter.

2. In the present appeal, the appellant-State acquiring body has assailed the judgment and award dated 30.09.2019 passed in Land Acquisition Reference (LAR) Nos.421, 424 and 427 of 2012.

3. It is not disputed that the judgment and award emanating from LAR Nos.419 to 428 of 2012 has been decided by the aforesaid judgment and these are left out first appeals. The Coordinate Bench of this Court in the judgment dated 16.12.2021 passed in First Appeal No.1704 of 2021 and allied matter has observed thus:-

"7. I have perused the records of the appeals and considered the submission canvassed by both the sides. It is an undisputed fact that the impugned judgment and award is based on the basis of previous judgment and award of the same Reference Case passed in respect of

C/FA/1696/2021 ORDER DATED: 11/10/2022

village Santej. It is also an undisputed fact that the judgment and award of the Reference Court in respect of village Santej was assailed by the appellants by filing First Appeal No. 2484 of 2015 and connected first appeals.

8. This Court by judgment dated 25.2.2019 in First Appeal No. 2484 of 2015 and connected first appeals confirmed the said award of the Reference Court. The appellant thereafter, preferred Special Leave Petition in the Hon'ble Supreme Court to challenge the judgment and award of this Court. In the appeal memo itself it is stated that the said Special Leave Petition is dismissed.

9. In view of the aforesaid admitted facts, the submission of Mr. Manraj Barot, learned AGP that the Reference Court ought not to have relied upon earlier / previous award of the Reference Court in respect of contagious village Santej cannot be accepted. It emerges from the judgment and award that the First Appeal No.2484 of 2015 and connected first appeals were dismissed by this Court confirming the award of the Reference Court in respect of village Santej. Only because at the time of passing of the impugned judgment, the Special Leave Petition was pending in the Hon'ble Supreme Court cannot be ground to hold that the Reference Court ought not to have relied upon the judgment and award in respect of village Santej.

10. Mr. Manraj Barot, learned AGP for the appellants could not point out any material difference between the nature of the lands of village Rancharda and village Santej. I am, therefore, of the view that the Reference Court has not committed any error in passing the award on the basis of comparable previous award in respect of village Santej.

11. In view of the above, present first appeals lack merit. The impugned judgment and award of the Reference Court dated 30.9.2019 passed by learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, at Kalol in L.A.R. Nos. 424 and 427 of 2012 does not warrant any interference in these first appeals."

4. Hence, the present appeal is dismissed in terms of the judgment dated 16.12.2021 passed in First Appeal No.1704 of 2021 and allied matter.

5. As a sequel, civil application does not survive and the same is disposed of accordingly.

(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) ABHISHEK/5