Gujarat High Court
Hareshbhai Vitthalbhai Chauhan vs State Of Gujarat on 2 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/260/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 260 of 2019
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 261 of 2019
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 262 of 2019
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 263 of 2019
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 264 of 2019
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 265 of 2019
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 266 of 2019
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
================================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
================================================================
HARESHBHAI VITTHALBHAI CHAUHAN
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR CHIRAG B PATEL(3679) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS ROSHNI PATEL, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Defendant(s)
No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
PRACHCHHAK
Date : 02/09/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Present appeals are filed by the appellants - original claimants
under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter be
referred to as "the Act") read with Section 96 of the Code of Civil
Procedure Code, 1908 challenging the common judgment and award
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/260/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/09/2025
undefined
dated 14.08.2018 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge,
Savli, Dist. Vadodara (hereinafter be referred to as "the Reference
Court") in Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos.745 of 2017 to 751 of
2017 (Main LAR No.745 of 2017) (Old No.3033 of 1999 to 3047 of
1999), whereby the Reference Court has awarded Rs.55.33ps. per
square meter, over-and-above the amount awarded by the Special
Land Acquisition Officer.
2. Brief facts giving rise to the present appeals are that, the State
Government acquired the lands of the appellants - original claimants
situated at Village: Kumetha, Taluka: Waghodiya, District: Vadodara
for the purpose of construction for four way road connected to
Vadodara-Halol-Godhra Road at village Kumetha, Ta. Waghodia, Dist.
Vadodara. That, notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition
Act (hereinafter be referred to as "the Act") was published in
Government Gazette on 04.09.1997 and declaration under Section 6
of the Act was published in the gazette on 11.12.1997. The Special
Land Acquisition Office after issuance of notice under Section 9 of the
Act and after hearing the parties declared the award under Section 11
of the Act on 18.12.1998 and awarded the compensation on the lower
side.
3. Being aggrieved, the appellants - original claimants, preferred
the aforesaid LAR Cases under Section 18 of the Act for additional
compensation of Rs.150/- per square meter. The Reference Court had
framed the issue at Exh.-6 referred in para-7 and the same were
replied in para-8 and after considering the oral as well as the
documentary evidence led by both the sides, the judgment and award
dated 14.08.2018 came to be passed by the Reference Court,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/260/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/09/2025
undefined
whereby the Reference Court has awarded Rs.55.33ps. per square
meter, over-and-above the amount awarded by the Special Land
Acquisition Officer. This has aggrieved the appellants, have preferred
the present appeals raising various grounds.
4. Heard Mr. Chirag B. Patel, learned counsel appearing for the
appellants and Ms.Roshni Patel, learned Assistant Government
Pleader appearing for respondent - State Authorities.
5. Learned counsel Mr. Patel has submitted the same facts which
are narrated in the memo of appeals. He has referred and relied upon
the decision of this Court passed in group of First Appeal Nos. 379 of
2009 to 388 of 2009 and submitted that in the said group of appeal,
this Court has dismissed the appeals preferred by the State and
confirmed the award passed by the Reference Court considering the
fact that in the said group of First Appeal, notification under Section 4
was issued in the year 1986 and in the instant case, it was issued in
the year 1997 and therefore, there is a clear difference of 11 years,
however, the Reference Court has considered only five years and
there was no justification as to why the Reference Court has not
considered the difference of 11 years. He has submitted that in para-
16 of the impugned judgment and award, the Reference Court has
erred in observing calculation and only five years enhancement has
been calculated i.e. from 1992 to 1997 and remaining six years of
enhancement i.e. from 1986 to 1992 @ 10% has not been calculated
nor considered by the Reference Court and there is no justification at
all and therefore, learned counsel Mr. Patel has urged that the present
appeals be allowed and the impugned judgment and award passed by
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/260/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/09/2025
undefined
the Reference Court be modified and the amount of compensation be
enhanced.
6. As against that, Ms. Roshni Patel, learned AGP appearing for the
respondent State Authorities, has vehemently opposed the present
appeal and submitted that the Reference Court has rightly considered
the facts of the case while passing the impugned judgment and award
and there is no any infirmity or any irregularity committed by the
Reference Court while awarding the additional amount of
compensation and there is no error made by the Reference Court in
calculating the said amount and therefore, the present appeals are
required to be dismissed, however, the learned AGP Ms. Patel is
unable to controvert the findings recorded by the Reference Court as
to why the Reference Court has not considered the enhancement for
increase of 10% for a period of 11 years.
7. Heard learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and
perused the material placed on record. It appears from the record
that, the claimants had examined one Hareshbhai Vithhalbhai
Chauhan at Exh.-8 and also produced documentary evidence viz.,
copy of award in LAQ No. 22 of 1997, copy of Judgment on LAR No.
963 of 1990 and copy of order passed in First Appeal No. 381 of 2009.
It also appears from the record that, in the acquisition for the same
village and in the same group of Reference cases, this Court has
already decided the group of First Appeal Nos. 379 of 2009 to 388 of
2009 vide order dated 06.03.2009 and dismissed the appeal preferred
by the State Government, meaning thereby that, the award passed by
the Reference Court was confirmed by this Court, however, while
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/260/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/09/2025
undefined
considering the facts of the case, the Reference Court has committed
an error by holding that the claimants though entitled for 10%
increase per annum, the Reference Court has considered only 7.5%
increase. It also appears that qua the land of village Kumetha which
was earlier acquired by the respondent in which notification under
Section 4 was issued in the year 1986, whereas in the instant case,
the notification under Section 4 was issued on 04.09.1997 and,
therefore, there was a clear 11 years' difference in issuance of both
the notifications, however, the Reference Court has granted only 5
years increase and not considered for 11 years. The controversy
involved in the present appeals is only to the effect that the
Reference Court while considering the fact that there was a difference
of 11 years in issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act qua
the land of village Kumetha which were earlier acquired by the
respondents, however, there is no justifiable reason stated by the
Reference Court while considering the enhancement only for a period
of five years in the instant case, more particularly in para-16 and 17,
as mentioned by the Reference Court and therefore, I am of the
opinion that an increase of 10% per annum is required to be
considered for a period of 11 years. The Reference Court has awarded
Rs.55.33ps., considering the difference from 1988 to 1992 i.e. for a
period of five years and therefore, six years' difference is required to
be added, which comes to Rs.85.36ps. per square meter (Rs.55.33ps
+ 4.14 = 59.47 + 4.46 = 63.93 + 4.79 = 68.72 + 5.15 = 73.87 +
5.54 = 79.41 + 5.95 = 85.36).
8. In the result, all the First Appeals are partly allowed. The
impugned judgment and award dated 14.08.2018 passed by the
learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Savli, Dist. Vadodara in Land
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/260/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/09/2025
undefined
Acquisition Reference Case Nos.745 of 2017 to 751 of 2017 is hereby
modified to the extent that the claimants are entitled for an additional
amount of Rs.85.36ps., per square meter alongwith statutory benefits
including solatium and interest. The respondent shall deposit
additional amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.85.36ps., per
square meter with statutory benefits before the Reference Court
within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
On deposit of the amount, the same shall be disbursed in favour of
each claimant, through RTGS / NEFT and the bank account details
shall be furnished by the counsel for the claimants to the Registry of
the Reference Court, Vadodara. Other observations of the Reference
Court for statutory benefits provided under the Act shall remain
intact. Decree be drawn accordingly. Record and proceedings be sent
back to the concerned Reference Court forthwith.
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
Dolly
