[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition And ... vs Piprana Pradeshik Kelvani Mandal, ... on 1 December, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/293/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 293 of 2024
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2023
In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 293 of 2024
==========================================================
DEPUTY COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION AND REHABILITATION
Versus
PIPRANA PRADESHIK KELVANI MANDAL, PIPRANA
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR BHAVESH DESAI, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Appellant(s)
No. 1
MR DHARMESH R PATEL(5592) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 01/12/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. This appeal has been filed challenging the judgment
and award dated 01.11.2021 passed by the learned
Reference Court in Land Reference Case Nos.142 of
2017, 143 of 2017 and 144 of 2017, whereby the
learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bayad, District
Aravalli, determined the market value of the acquired
land at ₹300/- per square meter and the value of the
houses (construction) at ₹2,375/- per square meter.
2. It is the case of the present appellant before this
Court that the land in question was acquired for an
irrigation scheme situated at village Piprana, Taluka
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/293/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
Maalpur, District Sabarkantha, now forming part of
District Aravalli. The final notification under Section 4
of the Land Acquisition Act was published on
09.11.1990, and the notification under Section 6
came to be published on 09.04.1991. Thereafter, the
award under Section 11 was passed on 27.02.1992,
whereby the market value of the open land was
determined at ₹2.75 per square meter, and the value
of House No.30 was assessed at ₹40,329.53/-, House
No.166 at ₹6,494.90/-, and House No.179 at
₹10,921.71/-.
3. Challenging the aforesaid market value, an
application came to be filed under Section 18 of the
Land Acquisition Act before the learned Reference
Court, wherein the claimants sought additional
compensation of ₹700/- per square meter for the
open land and ₹8,000/- per square meter for the
construction. The learned Reference Court, while
partly allowing the Reference filed by the claimants,
reassessed the market value as stated hereinabove,
which is now the subjecChallenging the aforesaid
market value, an application came to be filed under
Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act before the
learned Reference Court, wherein the claimants
sought additional compensation of ₹700/- per square
meter for the open land and ₹8,000/- per square
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/293/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
meter for the construction. The learned Reference
Court, while partly allowing the Reference filed by the
claimants, reassessed the market value as stated
hereinabove, which is now the subject matter of
challenge before this Courtt matter of challenge
before this Court.
4. Heard the learned AGP Mr.Desai for the appellant
State.
5. Though, learned AGP Mr. Desai has meticulously read
the award of the learned Reference Court, is unable
to point out any error apparent on the face of the
record, perversity in appreciation of evidence, or any
ground warranting interference with the impugned
judgment and award.
6. Having considered the reasons assigned by the
learned Reference Court and, more particularly, the
evidence produced below Exhibit 121 as well as
Exhibits 124 to 127, namely the testimony of the
government-approved valuer and the valuation
report wherein the market value of the open land is
assessed at ₹300 per square meter and that of the
constructed houses at ₹2,375 per square meter, this
Court finds that the learned Reference Court has
rightly determined the market value on the basis of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/293/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
the said government valuer's report. In absence of
any infirmity, perversity, or legal error being pointed
out by learned AGP Mr. Desai, this Court finds no
reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and
award, and accordingly, the present appeal deserves
to be dismissed.
7. Resultantly, the present appeals fail and are hereby
dismissed. The impugned judgment and award dated
01.11.2021 passed by the learned Principal Senior
Civil Judge, Bayad, District Aravalli in Land Reference
Case Nos. 142 of 2017, 143 of 2017 and 144 of 2017
is accordingly affirmed. The Civil Application also
stands disposed of.
(M. K. THAKKER,J)
M.M.MIRZA
