Gujarat High Court
General Manager vs Rabari Nagji Sartanbhai on 24 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3729/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3729 of 2009
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3730 of 2009
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3731 of 2009
==========================================================
GENERAL MANAGER
Versus
RABARI NAGJI SARTANBHAI & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR AJAY R MEHTA(453) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
ADVOCATE NOTICE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Defendant(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 24/11/2025
COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Present appeals are filed by the appellant - O.N.G.C. under
Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act r/w Section 96 of the Code
of Civil Procedure challenging the judgment and award dated
29.12.2008 passed in L.A.R. Nos. 1873, 1874 and 1875 of 2003 by
the Additional District and Sessions Judge, 5 th Fast Track Court,
Mehsana (hereinafter referred to as the "Reference Court"). The
Reference Court has partly allowed the said Reference and
awarded compensation of Rs.136/- per Sq. Mtr. over and above
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3729/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/11/2025
undefined
the amount of compensation of Rs.26.50 ps. already awarded by
the Special Land Acquisition Officer.
2. The facts in brief are that the lands situated at village Meda
Adraj, Tal. Kadi, Dist. Mehsana were acquired for the purpose of
Drilling No. IJL - 8 (JREO) by the appellant - O.N.G.C. For L.A.R.
Nos. 1873, 1874 and 1875 of 2003. Notification under Section 4 of
the Act was published on 24.03.2003 and under Section 6 was
published on 21.05.2003. The Land Acquisition Officer, after
issuing notice to the claimants and after hearing the claimants and
considering the evidence led by the claimants has passed an
award dated 11.07.2003 awarding compensation at the rate of
Rs.26.50 ps. per Sq. Mtr. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the
award of the Land Acquisition Officer, the claimants filed reference
proceedings claiming compensation at the rate of Rs.225/- per Sq.
Mtr.
2.1 After considering the relevant materials and after considering
the oral as well as the documentary evidence, the Reference Court
partly allowed references and awarded Rs.136/- per Sq. Mtr. over
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3729/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/11/2025
undefined
and above, the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition
Officer.
2.2 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned
judgment and awards passed by the Reference Court the,
appellant - O.N.G.C. has filed present First Appeals.
3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Ajay Mehta for the appellant and
learned AGP Mr. Brijensinh Thakur for the respondent No. 2.
4. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the
Reference Court has not considered the facts while determining
the market value in its true and proper spirit. He has also
submitted that the Division Bench of this Court, vide judgment and
order dated 06.08.2015 passed in First Appeal No. 3531 of 2011
with Cross Objection No. 116 of 2012 with respect to the village
Merda, has fixed the value at Rs. 44/- per Sq. Mtr. He has also
submitted that the Reference Court has awarded a very high
amount in present Appeals without considering the said fact.
4.1 Learned advocate for the appellant has referred to and relied
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3729/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/11/2025
undefined
upon the observations made by the Division Bench of this Court in
paragraph No. 5 of the above referred judgment and order, which
read as under:
"5. This court has gone through the documentary evidence placed on record
alongwith the award of the reference court. The reference court has relied upon
awards passed with respect of acquisition of lands of nearby villages. On basis of the
said award, the reference court considered the compensation of around Rs. 69/- per
sq. mt keeping in mind the notification under section 4 dated 05.04.2003 in that case.
In the present case, the section 4 notification was issued on 31.12.1998. Considering
the difference and time gap of around four years and four months and keeping the
price at Rs. 69/- intact, we are of the view that the reference court ought to have
arrived at compensation considering 40% decrease in price which comes to Rs. 44/-
on the basis of reducing value method. Thus, the claimants are entitled to get Rs. 40/-
per sq. mtr as additional compensation over and above Rs. 4/- per sq. mtr already
granted by the Land Acquisition Officer." additional compensation over and above Rs.
4/- per sq. mtr already granted by the Land Acquisition Officer."
4.2 Learned advocate for the appellant has referred to and relied
upon the decision of the coordinate bench of this Court dated
18.03.2024 passed in First Appeal Nos. 4044 of 2009 and allied
matters and submitted that in the said decision, the learned Single
Judge has considered the value of the land at Rs.75/- per Sq. Mtr.
and therefore, present Appeals deserve to be allowed.
5. As against that, learned advocate for the respondents-
claimants has submitted that the respondent original claimants
have lost their lands way back in 1999 and since long they are
fighting for the compensation. Referred and relied upon the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3729/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/11/2025
undefined
decision of this Court dated 06.02.2013 passed in First Appeal
Nos. 3682 of 2012 and allied matters, wherein the appellant
corporation has accepted the award and entered into settlement
with the respondents and submitted that now the corporation
cannot take different stand, as the corporation has accepted the
amount awarded by the Reference Court. He has also submitted
that in another group of the references, for the same village Merda,
the Reference Court has, vide judgment and award dated
06.08.2013 passed in L.A.R. Nos. 1746 and 1747 of 2009, after
considering the earlier land reference cases and after considering
the facts and submissions of both the sides, has awarded Rs.137/-
per sq. mtr. meaning thereby, it is subsequent decision of the
Reference Court. He has submitted that even in the another group
of references for the same village Merda i.e. L.A.R. Nos. 1007 of
2013 and allied group of appeals, the Reference Court has
awarded Rs.203.69 ps. per Sq. Mtr. vide judgment and award
dated 06.02.2014, wherein the date of notification under Section 4
was of February 2009.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3729/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/11/2025
undefined
5.1 Learned advocate for the respondents- claimants has
submitted that in another decision of the same village i.e. Merda
under L.A.R. Nos. 1121 of 2011 and allied references, the
Reference Court has awarded an additional amount of Rs.76.50
ps. per Sq. Mtr. and in reference case No. 5373 of 2000 for the
same village, the Reference Court has awarded an amount of
Rs.100/- per Sq. Mtr. and the same was also accepted by the
corporation and not challenged further and therefore, under such
circumstances, the present Appeals deserve to be dismissed,
since the subsequent decision of the Reference Court, the amount
was awarded on very higher side.
6. I have perused the materials available on record and
relevant documents and considered the submission of learned
advocates for the parties. Perused record and proceedings.
7. It appears that in present Appeals, the land acquisition
reference cases were decided on 29.12.2008. Meaning thereby, all
the subsequent awards passed by the reference are decided later
on and therefore, the same were not produced before the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3729/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/11/2025
undefined
Reference Court. All these subsequent events are required to be
pointed out before the Reference Court but unfortunately, the
decision in the present appeals is prior thereto and therefore, all
these subsequent events are required to be produced before the
concerned Reference Court, so that the Reference Court can
decide the impugned references after considering all these
materials including decision of this Court, which are subsequent to
the effect.
8. In view of the above, it is appropriate to send the matters
back to the concerned Reference Court for a fresh decision to be
taken by the Reference Court, after considering all these facts.
9. Hence, present matters are remitted back to the Reference
Court for fresh decision in the Reference Cases. It is open for all
the concerned parties to raise all the contentions available in law
and the same shall be decided by the Reference Court without
influenced by earlier award. Since, the matter is of 2003 therefore,
learned Reference Court shall decide the impugned references as
expeditiously as possible and preferably within four months from
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/3729/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/11/2025
undefined
the date of receipt of copy of present order. It is also observed that
all the concerned parties shall cooperate to the concerned
Reference Court and without taking any unnecessary
adjournments, proceed with the matter in accordance with law.
The Reference Court is also directed to decide the reference
cases after considering all the relevant materials agitated before it.
9.1 The appellant has deposited the awarded amount of which,
part is withdrawn by the claimants and remaining amount is lying in
fixed deposit. Therefore, it is directed that the said amount will
continue to remain in fixed deposit subject to final determination by
the Reference Court pursuant to present order.
10. All these appeals are disposed of accordingly. The impugned
judgment and awards dated 29.12.2008 passed in L.A.R. Nos.
1873, 1874 and 1875 of 2003 by the Reference Court are hereby
quashed and set aside. Direct service is permitted. Record and
proceedings, if received, be sent back to the concerned Reference
Court forthwith.
(D. M. DESAI,J)
MUSKAN
