The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of fair compensation for acquired lands based on the prevailing market rate and the evidence presented to establish the market value.

JUDGMENT :

(Nisha M. Thakore, J.)

1. This group of appeals are filed by the original claimants under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 r/w Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 challenging the judgment and award dated 30.01.2018 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Amreli in group of Land Reference Case Nos. 154 of 1999 and allied matters.

2. The learned Principal Senior Civil Judge has recorded the common evidence of aforesaid Land Acquisition Cases and has treated the Land Reference Case No.154 of 1999 as lead case.

3. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present appeals as pleaded by the original claimants are briefly summarized as under:

3.1. The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, Amreli intended to acquire the various lands situated at the outskirts of village Venivadar of Amreli Taluka for the purpose of “Vadi Irrigation Project”, for which, a proposal was sent to the State of Gujarat. Considering the proposal, the State of Gujarat had accordingly issued Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) on 5.7.1996 followed by Notification under Section 6 of the Act, which came to be published in the Government Gazette on 1.7.1997 and was published thereafter in the daily newspapers. The lands proposed to be acquired under the said project were mentioned in the aforesaid Notification since the lands were required for the public purpose, the Notification under Section 9 of the Act came to be served upon the interested parties.

3.2. The Land Acquisition Officer of the aforesaid Reference Cases proceeded to determine the rate of the lands acquired whereby he awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.1050/- per Are (Rs.10.50 per sq mtr) for Bagayat Land and Rs.700/- per Are (Rs.7.0 per sq mtrs) for Jirayat Land.

3.3. The appellants-original claimants being dissatisfied with the aforesaid award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer preferred Land Reference Case under Section 18 of the Act. The Principal grievance which was agitated by the original claimants was that the Land Acquisition Officer had failed to take into consideration the prevailing market rate at the relevant time of Notification issued under Section 4 of the said Act and had submitted that the Land Acquisition Officer had undervalued the market value of the lands without considering the development being made by the applicants on such lands, which were used for agricultural purpose. Thus, the original claimants have prayed for compensation at the rate of Rs.400/- per sq mtrs for their acquired lands. The claimants have also claimed additional amount of compensation at the rate of 12% as per provisions of Section 23(1-A) and had also claimed solatium at the rate of 30% on such market value and the admissible interest as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. The Land Reference Cases were registered as LAR Nos. 155 of 1999 to 164 of 1999 before the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Amreli.

4. Notices were duly served upon the opponents and written statement filed vide Exh.9 objecting to grant an additional compensation as prayed for by the original claimants. The Reference Court upon considering the pleadings of the original claimants and the defence raised by the opponent framed the issues vide Exh.10, which reads thus:

“1.Whether the compensation awarded by the special land Acquisition officer is not fair and adequate ? If yes.

2. What additional compensation the claimant’s are entitled to ?

3. What order ?”

After considering the submissions made by the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and upon appreciation of the evidence which has come on record as well as the authorities which were relied upon by the respective parties, the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge proceeded to determine the actual market value of the lands so acquired. The Reference Court noted that the Land Acquisition Officer has determined the price