Gujarat High Court
Deputy Collector Land Acquisition And ... vs Lh Of Lt Thakor Aedrajji Galji on 25 July, 2025
Author: Sangeeta K. Vishen
Bench: Sangeeta K. Vishen
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3893/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025
undefined
Reserved On : 17/03/2025
Pronounced On : 25/07/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3893 of 2021
With
R/CROSS OBJECTION NO. 300 of 2024
In
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3893 of 2021
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 856 of 2022
With
R/CROSS OBJECTION NO. 5 of 2025
In
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 856 of 2022
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
DEPUTY COLLECTOR LAND ACQUISITION AND REHABILITATION
OFFICER & ANR.
Versus
LH OF LT THAKOR AEDRAJJI GALJI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS FORAM TRIVEDI AGP for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
MR JAY R SHAH(8428) for the Defendant(s) No. 1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4
MR JINESH H KAPADIA(5601) for the Defendant(s) No. 1.1,1.2,1.3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3893/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025
undefined
CAV COMMON JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA)
[1] These First Appeals filed by the appellants - State
authorities and the Cross Objections filed by the respondents -
original Claimants are directed against the judgment and award
dated 19th April 2019 passed in Land Acquisition Reference Nos.35
of 2017 and 36 of 2017, whereby the learned Principal Senior Civil
Judge, Deodar has partly allowed the Reference and awarded
additional compensation at the rate of Rs.333.50 per sq. mtrs.
along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the additional
compensation from the date of taking over the possession for the
first year and thereafter, 15% per annum till actual realization of
the payable aggregate amount.
[2] The brief facts can be stated as under:
[2.1] That the land of the original claimants situated at
village : Lakhani, Taluka : Lakhani, District : Banaskantha, came to
be acquired for the public purpose of Spreading Canal of Sujalam
Safalam. Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3893/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025
undefined
1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short) was issued on
1st July 2004 and declaration under Section 6 of the Act was made
on 5th January 2005 and the same culminated into the award under
Section 11(1) of the Act, which was made and declared by the Land
Acquisition Officer on 21st February 2005. The Land Acquisition
Officer by the said award determined the market value of the land
acquired at Rs.8.50 per sq. mtrs.
[2.2] Being dissatisfied with the said award, the respondent
along with other land owners preferred an application as provided
under Section 18 of the Act and the same was referred to the
Reference Court at Deodar, which came to be numbered as Land
Acquisition Reference Nos.35 of 2017 and 36 of 2017.
[2.3] In the said reference, both the parties have led oral as
well as documentary evidence to support their claim. The
Reference Court, after appreciation of the evidence on record,
partly allowed the reference application and determined the market
value of the land under acquisition at Rs.333.50 per sq. mtrs. and
also awarded all statutory benefits as provided under Sections
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3893/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025
undefined
23(1)(a) and 23(2) of the Act.
[3] Being aggrieved by the same, the appellants - State
authorities have preferred these First Appeals and for enhancement
of the claim, the original Claimants have filed cross objections.
[4] We have heard learned Assistant Government Pleader
Mr. Aditya Jadeja for the appellants - State authorities and Mr.
Jinesh Kapadia for the respondents - Original Claimants.
[5] At the outset, learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties have submitted that in acquisition proceedings
with respect to very same village, the Coordinate Division Bench of
this Court, vide judgment dated 18th December 2023 passed in
R/First Appeal No.669 of 2019 and allied appeals with Cross
Objections, has already decided the issue of compensation.
Relevant observations made by the Coordinate Division Bench of
this Court in the said R/First Appeal No.669 of 2019 are quoted
hereinbeblow:
"14. We have considered the ratio laid down and the principle
enunciated in the aforesaid decisions. It is found out that the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3893/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025
undefined
principles governing determination of market value of lands
acquired are well- settled and at the time of determination of
the compensation, the Hon'ble Supreme Court issued certain
directions as regard the the methods of valuation to be
considered i.e. (1) opinion of experts, (2) the prices paid within
a reasonable time in bonafide transactions of purchase or sale of
the lands acquired or of the lands adjacent to those acquired
and possessing similar advantages and (3) a number of years'
purchase of the actual or immediately prospective profits of the
lands acquired. Therefore valuation made by the Valuation
Committee can be a valid basis for the Reference Court in
deciding the valuation of the land for the purpose of awarding
compensation, subject to any change in the nature of the land,
character etc. If the impugned judgment and order of the
Reference Court is examined in light of the aforesaid
observations and discussions, it appears to us that there is no
error committed by the Reference Court in relying upon the
price fixed for allotment of the land for the public purpose of
Spreading Canal of Sujalam Safalam, but the Reference Court
has committed error in not considering the aspect that the
valuation as was made of the land in question on 20.05.2004
and the said valuation is to be considered, keeping in view the
principles, as observed herein above and the Reference Court has
also totally lost sight of in not considering the deduction to be
made in the nature of the land allotted for non-agricultural
purpose and the acquisition of agricultural land in the present
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3893/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025
undefined
case.
15. From the facts of the case, as stated above, it is found out
that it is the case of the original claimants that the Valuation
Committee has fixed the valuation of the Government land on
20.05.2004, whereas the Notification under Section 4 of the Act
was published on 30.06.2004 i.e. after the fixation of the
valuation of the land by the Valuation Committee and, hence,
they are entitled for additional compensation, for which,
reliance is put upon the decision of this Court in case of Patel
Haribhai Manilal (supra) as well as in case of Amaji
Mohanji Thakore (supra) and though the aforesaid facts have
been pointed out before the Reference Court, it has not been
considered and 40% deduction was made instead of 20@,
which the original claimants are entitled for. We have gone
through the record and proceeding and found out that the
Reference Court has considered the report dated 20.05.2004 of
the Valuation Committee. It is found out that the Reference
Court has correctly evaluated the the report of the Valuation
Committee but at the time of considering the amount, 40%
amount is deducted from the said amount mentioned in the
report solely on the count that in identical matter in case of
Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd. delivered in First Appeal
Nos.2832 to 2843 of 2006, the Division Bench of this Court has
deducted 40% amount from the price fixed by the competent
authority. It is found out from the record that in the said
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3893/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025
undefined
matter, the acquired land was situated in outskirt of the city
area, whereas the present land, which is acquired by the
acquiring body, is situated within the center of the city and as
per the evidence led by the original claimants, surrounding and
vicinity area of the acquired land is well developed area and in
future, the Government need not have to spend any amount for
the development of the said area, therefore, basic price value of
the said land is on higher side, therefore, the deduction is
required to be made 20% instead of 40%. We have gone
through the record and proceedings and found out that the
land, which was acquired by the acquiring body, is small plot
and situated within the center of the city, therefore, we are of
the opinion that the original claimants are entitled for 20%
deduction instead of 40% deduction."
[6] The aforesaid decision was also followed in the
subsequent decision of the Coordinate Division Bench of this Court
in R/First Appeal No.4646 of 2018 and allied appeals with Cross
Objections decided on 18th June 2024.
[7] Considering the aforesaid decisions which are
pertaining to the same acquisition and of the very same village, the
aforesaid decision dated 18th December 2023 rendered by the
Coordinate Division Bench of this Court in R/First Appeal No.669
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3893/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025
undefined
of 2019 and allied appeals is squarely applicable to the present case
and thereby, this Court is unable to take any different view as has
been taken by the Coordinate Division Bench of this Court in
R/First Appeal No.669 of 2019 and allied appeals. So far as
deduction of 40% is concerned, the Coordinate Division Bench of
this Court has observed that deduction of 40% is incorrect and
instead of that, 20% requires to be deducted.
[8] Accordingly, R/First Appeals filed by the appellants -
State authorities are hereby dismissed and Cross Objections by the
respondents - original Claimants are hereby allowed. Therefore,
the impugned judgment and award dated 19th April 2019 passed
by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Deodar in Land
Acquisition Reference Nos.35 of 2017 and 36 of 2017 is hereby
modified to the extent that instead of compensation at Rs.333.50
per sq. mtr., the original claimants are entitled to get compensation
at Rs.493.50 per sq. mtr. Thus, claimants shall be entitled to
additional compensation at Rs.160/- per sq. mtr. The authorities
are hereby directed to pay all the statutory benefits and the same
shall be deposited with the Nazir of the concerned Court within a
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3893/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/07/2025
undefined
period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order and on
deposit of such amount, the same is directed to be disbursed and
paid to the respective claimants, on due verification of their
identity, by account payee cheque.
(SANGEETA K. VISHEN,J)
(NIRAL R. MEHTA,J)
CHANDRESH
