Gujarat High Court
Union Of India vs State Of Gujarat on 8 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/95/2024 ORDER DATED: 08/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 95 of 2024
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1600 of 2024
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1601 of 2024
================================================================
UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR SHUSHIL R SHUKLA(5603) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
MR RAHUL DAVE, MS DHARITRI PANCHOLI & MS DEVANSHI PATEL,
AGPs in FA Nos.95, 1600 and 1601 of 2024 respectively for the Defendant(s)
No. 1
NOTICE UNSERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2.2,2.3,2.4,2.5
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 08/09/2025
COMMON ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Shushil R. Shukla for the appellants
and learned AGPs Mr. Rahul Dave, Ms. Dharitri Pancholi and
Ms. Devanshi Patel for the respondent-State in the respective
appeals. Perused the record.
2. By way of present First Appeals filed under Section 54 of the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the appellants herein - original
claimants have challenged the common judgment and award
dated 9.11.2022 passed by the learned 4 th Additional Senior
Civil Judge, Rajkot in Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos.1055
of 1998 to 1057 of 1998 (Old LAR Case Nos.67 to 69 of 1986).
3. When these appeals were taken up for hearing, learned
advocates for the parties have submitted jointly that the land
reference Court has committed serious errors by recording false
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/95/2024 ORDER DATED: 08/09/2025
undefined
observations. It is pointed by learned advocates for the parties
that the learned Reference Court has observed that though oral
deposition of claimant has recorded at Ex.33, the original
opponent did not examine the claimant. However, the
observations of learned Reference Court is false as the oral
deposition is recorded at Exh.33 was incomplete an no
opportunity was given to the present appellant to cross
examine the claimant. The said contention has been candidly
accepted by learned advocate for the respondent - claimant.
Learned advocate for the respondent - claimant has also
submitted that no opportunity to cross examine the claimant
was granted by learned Reference Court and straightaway the
reference proceedings were decided. It is further contended
that some of the claimants have expired during the pendency
of reference proceedings, an application to bring the heirs of
the deceased claimant though submitted, learned Reference
Court did not decide that application and proceeded with the
reference proceedings in absence of legal heirs of deceased
claimant.
4. On the aforesaid submissions, learned advocate for the
appellant and learned advocate for the respondent - claimant
have jointly requested this Court to quash and set aside the
impugned judgment and award and further requested to
remand the Reference proceedings for its fresh adjudication
after giving full opportunity to both the sides.
5. On perusal of the record and proceedings as well as the
impugned judgment and award, it appears that the oral
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/95/2024 ORDER DATED: 08/09/2025
undefined
deposition of the claimant - Babubhai Bhikhabhai Karadiya is
recorded at Exh.33 in LAQ No.67 of 1986 (New LAQ No.1055 of
1998). On perusal of the deposition recorded at Exh.33, the
deposition has remained incomplete upon request of learned
advocate Mr. Vyas. Thereafter, no further deposition has been
recorded. Learned AGP also moved an application for closure of
the evidence of claimant as the claimant did not remain present
for cross examination. By order dated 15.2.2018, the right of
evidence of the claimant was closed by the learned Reference
Court in reference case No.1055 of 1998 (The Reference
No.1055 of 2018 has been referred in order below Exh.68 page
No.327 of the R & P). Thus, it appears that the learned
reference Court has not even cared to see whether the correct
number of reference proceedings has been mentioned in the
proceedings or not. In the said reference proceedings, the
claimant moved and application Exh.70 requesting to reopen
the stage to record evidence. Such application was dismissed
by learned Reference Court on 16.11.2018. 2 nd attempt was
made by the claimant to request to reopen the stage to lead
evidence. In the 2nd attempt also, his request was rejected.
Despite this fact, the applicant Babubhai Bhanabhai submitted
examination in chief on 22.3.2019, however, the learned
Reference Court did not permit the applicant - claimant to
submit affidavit in lieu of examination in chief as the stage to
lead evidence was closed.
6. Despite the aforesaid factual position, the learned Reference
Court observed that the cross examination was not taken by
the opposite side. When there was no evidence on record that
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/95/2024 ORDER DATED: 08/09/2025
undefined
the claimant has remained absent in cross examination and the
stage of evidence was closed by the Court below, the finding
that cross examination was not taken by opposite side is
against the evidence on record. By deciding the Reference
Cases without giving an opportunity to the opponent to lead
evidence, in my view, the judgment and award dated 9.11.2022
passed by the learned 4th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Rajkot in
Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos.1055 of 1998 to 1057 of
1998 (Old LAR Case Nos.67 to 69 of 1986) is quashed and set
aside and more particularly, when learned advocates for the
parties upon instructions have consented in remanding the
matters for its fresh adjudication.
7. Learned Reference Court shall decide the Reference
Proceedings after considering the evidence on record. It is
needless to observe that contentions of both the sides are left
open for its determination. The entire exercise of disposal of the
reference case to be completed within a period of 3 (three)
months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The
parties shall give full cooperation to the learned Reference
Court without asking for unnecessary adjournments. Learned
advocates for the parties shall intimate their respective clients
regarding remand of the reference cases.
8. The appeals stand disposed of in above terms. R & P, if any, to
be sent back to the concerned Court immediately.
(D. M. DESAI,J)
vk
