Gujarat High Court
General Manager, Oil And Natural Gas ... vs Chaturbhai Prabhudas Patel on 23 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2986/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2986 of 2008
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2987 of 2008
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2989 of 2008
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
=======================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
=======================================
GENERAL MANAGER, OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD.
Versus
CHATURBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL & ANR.
=======================================
Appearance:
MR KUNAN B NAIK(3210) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS AGNEYA MANKAD AGP for the Defendant(s) No. 2
MR AV PRAJAPATI(672) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
=======================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
PRACHCHHAK
Date : 23/07/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. All these appeals involve common questions on law and
facts and therefore, the same are disposed of by this common
judgment.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2986/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025
undefined
2. These appeals have been filed against the common
judgment and award dated 11.01.2008 passed by the learned 9 th
Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mehsana, (hereinafter be referred
to as "the Reference Court') in Land Acquisition Reference Case
Nos. 4645 of 2003 to 4648 of 2003, whereby, the References
were partly allowed and the present appellants - ONGC was held
liable to pay additional amount of compensation to the original
claimants along with interest and costs.
3. The facts in brief are that the Special Land Acquisition
Officer under the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter be referred to
as "the Act") made a proposal for acquisition of the lands
situated at Village: Gamanpura, Taluka and District:
Mehsana belonging to the respondents - original claimants for
the public purpose. Notification under Section 4 of the Act was
published on 25.04.1997 and Notification under Section 6 of the
Act was published on 09.12.1997. That the Special Land
Acquisition Officer has acquired the lands by following procedure
as laid down under the provisions of the Act and under Section
11 of the Act, the Special Land Acquisition Officer, considering
the market value, has awarded compensation to the tune of
Rs.8.00 per square meter.
3.1 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the award passed by
the Special Land Acquisition Officer, the claimants have
preferred aforesaid References Cases before the Reference Court
and after considering the evidence on record and hearing the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2986/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025
undefined
respective parties, partly allowed the Reference Cases and
awarded an additional compensation to the tune of Rs.40/- per
square meter over-and-above the compensation awarded by the
Special Land Acquisition Officer.
3.2 Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award
passed by the Reference Court, the appellant has preferred the
present appeals.
4. Heard Mr.Kunan Naik, learned counsel for the appellant,
Mr.A. V. Prajapati, learned counsel for the respondents -
claimants and Ms. Agneya Mankad, learned Assistant
Government Pleader for the respondent - State of Gujarat and
perused the material on record.
5. Mr.Naik, learned counsel for the appellant - ONGC has
submitted that the Reference Court has erred in coming to the
conclusion that the original claimants would be entitled to
additional compensation of at the rate of Rs.40/- per square
meter over and above Rs.8.00 per square meter awarded by the
Land Acquisition Officer. Learned counsel has submitted that the
Reference Court ought to have held that the Land Acquisition
Officer has rightly awarded the compensation. Learned counsel
has also submitted that the Reference Court ought to have
considered the fact that no cogent evidence regarding the
fertility of the lands or the crops taken by the claimants in the
said lands and, therefore also, the oral evidence of the claimants
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2986/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025
undefined
could not have been believed. Learned counsel for the appellant
has also produced on record the judgment of this Court passed
on 29.08.2011 in First Appeal No. 2794 to 2797 of 2008 of the
same village, wherein, the appeals were partly allowed and the
award of the Reference Court was reduced from Rs.40/- per
square meter to Rs.36/- per square meter. Mr.Naik, learned
counsel has submitted that considering the aforesaid facts, the
present appeals may be allowed.
6. Mr.Prajapati, learned counsel for the respondents -
claimants has submitted that the Reference Court has, after
perusing the evidence on record, passed the judgment and
award and, therefore, the award of the Reference Court is just
and proper and no interference is required to be called for. He
has submitted that there is no any illegality and/or infirmity in
the impugned judgment and award passed by the Reference
Court. He has submitted that the appeals being meritless
deserve to be dismissed.
7. From the plain reading of the judgment of this Court, it is
clear that the present matters relates to the same Village:
Gamanpura and Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was
published on 25.04.1997 and Notification under Section 6 of the
Act was published on 28.04.1999. Therefore, it will be
appropriate to dispose of these appeals on the same terms.
8. In view of the judgment of the Coordinate Bench of this
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2986/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025
undefined
Court, the award of additional compensation awarded by the
Reference Court is reduced from Rs.40/- per square meter to
Rs.36/- per square meter. Therefore, the respondents -original
claimants are entitled to total amount of Rs.36/- per square
meter out of which the Special Land Acquisition Officer has
already awarded an amount of Rs.8/- per square meter. Now, the
respondents - original claimants are entitled to additional
amount of Rs.28/- per square meter from the appellant over and
above an amount of Rs.8/- per square meter awarded by the
Special Land Acquisition Officer. Award be drawn accordingly in
each appeal.
9. The appeals are partly allowed. There shall be no order as
to costs. Registry is directed to transmit back the record and
proceedings to the concerned Reference Court forthwith.
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
V.R. PANCHAL
