Thakor Takhuji Saratanji vs Special Land Acquisition Officer
2023 Latest Caselaw 3665 Guj

    C/FA/348/2022                                       JUDGMENT DATED: 29/04/2023




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                       R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 348 of 2022

                                   With
                       R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 349 of 2022
                                   With
                       R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 350 of 2022
                                   With
                       R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 351 of 2022
                                   With
                       R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1026 of 2022
                                   With
                       R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 352 of 2022
                                   With
                       R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 353 of 2022
                                   With
                       R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 347 of 2022

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL

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

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

2   To be referred to the Reporter or not ?                                  No

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

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

========================================================
                        THAKOR TAKHUJI SARATANJI
                                  Versus
                    SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
========================================================
Appearance:
MR ANKUR KIRI FOR MR AV PRAJAPATI(672) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
MS SURBHI BHATI ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Defendant(s)
No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2
========================================================


                                      Page 1 of 6

                                                               Downloaded on : Sat Apr 29 20:57:44 IST 2023
        C/FA/348/2022                                    JUDGMENT DATED: 29/04/2023




     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL

                                  Date : 29/04/2023

                           COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Heard learned Advocate Mr Ankur Kiri for learned Advocate Mr. A.V.

Prajapati on behalf of the appellants and learned Assistant Government Pleader

Ms. Surabhi Bhati on behalf of the respondent - State.

2. With the consent of the parties, the present first appeals are being taken up

for final hearing, more particularly, considering the submissions made by learned

Advocate for the appellants as would be noted hereinafter.

2.1. Learned Advocate Mr. Kiri, at the outset, would drawn the attention of

this Court to a judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench dated 19.03.2021 passed

in a group of 29 First Appeals. Learned Advocate would submit that the Land

References in the present case were part of a group of references against the order

of which, the above referred group of First Appeals had been preferred and

whereas, it is only on account of the fact that the preset appellants had not

preferred the appeals at the relevant point of time that the first appeals were not

listed with the group of first appeals as decided by this Court.

2.2. Learned Advocate would further elaborate by submitting that the lands in

question in both the appeals are situated at Village Dhandhusan, District Mehsana

and whereas, they were acquired for the SIPU project. Learned Advocate would

C/FA/348/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/04/2023

submit that Notifications under Section 4 of the Act with regard to the lands in

question were issued on 25.06.2004. Learned Advocate would submit that in the

group of appeals which were heard by this Court and disposed of vide order dated

19.03.2021 the Notification under Section 4 was issued on 03.07.2004.

2.3. Learned Advocate would submit that similarly, the learned Reference

Court had awarded an amount of Rs. 9.90/- per sq.meter and whereas the same

amount had been awarded by the learned Reference Court in the First Appeals

before this Court.

2.4. Learned Advocate would submit that since all the aspects being similar, the

decision, as taken by the Hon'ble Division Bench in group of appeals being First

Appeal No. 1796 of 2017 and allied matters, is clearly applicable to the facts of the

present case and whereas, learned Advocate would request that this Court may

award similar compensation as awarded by the Hon'ble Division Bench.

3. The position as regards the decision in First Appeal No. 1796 of 2017 and

allied matters being squarely applicable to the facts of the case is not contested by

learned AGP Ms. Bhati upon instruction and whereas, learned AGP would submit

vehemently that the State has preferred an appeal before the Hon'ble Apex Court

against the said decision and whereas, under such circumstances, the present first

appeals may not be decided and that the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court may

be awaited by this Court.

4. In response to the submissions made by learned AGP, learned Advocate

C/FA/348/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/04/2023

Mr. Kiri would submit that as such, the Special Leave Petitions have only been

filed by the State and whereas, there is no stay upon the decision granted by the

Hon'ble Apex Court. Learned Advocate would further submit that as it is, the

SLPs have been filed very recently i.e. on 03.03.2023 and are still in the defect list.

4.1. Learned Advocate would further submit that in any case, the legal

proposition being that unless a judgment is stayed by a superior Court, the effect

of the judgment would remain the same and would be a precedent binding upon

all the other Courts in similar issues.

4.2. At this stage, learned AGP Ms. Bhati would inform this Court that the

amount has already been deposited with the learned Reference Court.

5. Considering the submissions made by learned Advocates for the parties

and having regard to the very limited issue which is required to be considered by

this Court, this Court proposes to dispose of the present first appeals even

without framing any specific issues.

5.1. It would appear that the issue with regard to the applicability of the

judgment passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in First Appeal No. 1796 of 2017

and allied matters to the present cases are not in dispute. The only issue as has

been submitted by learned AGP being that the State has preferred an appeal

against the said decision before the Hon'ble Apex Court and whereas the decision

of the Hon'ble Apex Court be awaited.

C/FA/348/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/04/2023

5.2. In this regard, this Court is inclined to consider the submissions made by

learned Advocate Mr. Kiri on behalf of the appellants, more particularly, the same

being the applicable proposition of law i.e. a decision which is under challenge

before a superior court, would not lose its precedentiary value unless the said

decision is stayed by the superior court and unless and until such stay has been

granted, the law laid down by the said Court would be binding to all other courts

which are of coordinate strength or lesser strength.

6. Considering the issue involved, as noted hereinabove, since the facts more

or less are not in dispute and also having regard to the fact that the SLPs appear

to have been filed before the Hon'ble Apex Court and are presently in the defect

list and also considering the fact that in case of the claimants in the group of first

appeals decided by the Hon'ble Division Bench, the acquiring body has sought for

the grant from the State Government for the amount in question to be deposited

and the claimants are presently before the Executing Court for execution of the

decision, in the considered opinion of this Court, ends of justice would be met if

the appropriate directions in that regard are passed by this Court.

7. In view of the above discussion, the following directions are passed.

7.1. As decided by Hon'ble Division Bench in First Appeal No. 1796 of 2017

and allied matters vide common oral order dated 19.03.2021, it is declared that the

claimants are entitled to the compensation at the rate of Rs. 520/- per sq.meter of

the land.

C/FA/348/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/04/2023

7.2. The appellants claimants would be entitled to enhanced additional

compensation at the rate of Rs. 413 per sq.meter i.e. Rs. 520/- minus Rs. 107/-

(97.10+9.90).

7.3. As directed by the Hon'ble Division Bench, the claimants shall be entitled

to the additional amount of compensation with interest at the rate of 9% except

for such period from the date of award till the date of filing of the first appeals,

more particularly, in view of the voluntary waiver by the appellants at the stage of

application for condoning delay in filing of the Appeals.

7.4. As directed by the Hon'ble Division Bench, the additional compensation

shall be paid within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order.

8. The First Appeals are disposed of as allowed on the above terms.

(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J) NIRU