IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
BIREN VAISHNAV, MAUNA M. BHATT, JJ.
Special Land Acquisition Officer Unit 1 – Appellant
Versus
Parth Kaushikbhai Pandya Is Poa Of Jigar Anantbhai Desai – Respondent
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 11 of 2023 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR JOINING PARTY) NO. 1 of 2023, CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 2 of 2022, CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE) NO. 2 of 2023, CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE) NO. 3 of 2023, CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR JOINING PARTY) NO. 4 of 2023, R/CROSS OBJECTION NO. 222 of 2023, R/CROSS OBJECTION NO. 223 of 2023, R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 21 of 2023, CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR JOINING PARTY) NO. 3 of 2023, R/CROSS OBJECTION NO. 221 of 2023, R/CROSS OBJECTION NO. 181 of 2023, R/CROSS OBJECTION NO. 224 of 2023, R/CROSS OBJECTION NO. 225 of 2023, R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 22 of 2023, CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE) NO. 1 of 2023, R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2321 of 2022, F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 28415 of 2022, R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 99 of 2023, F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 42671 of 2022, R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 100 of 2023, F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 42652 of 2022, CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE) NO. 2 of 2023, CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR JOINING PARTY) NO. 3 of 2022
Decided on : 25-01-2024
JUDGMENT :
BIREN VAISHNAV, J.
ORDER IN FIRST APPEALS WITH CIVIL APPLICATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND CIVIL APPLICATIONS FOR STAY WITH CROSS-OBJECTIONS
1. The First Appeals are filed by the appellant – State challenging the judgment and order dated 05.03.2022 passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 by the learned Reference Court, Baroda (20th Senior Civil Judge at Vadodara), whereby, the rate of compensation under the respective land reference cases was increased from Rs.1914/- per sq. mtr. to Rs.26,048/- per sq. mtr..
1.1 Cross-objections have been filed by the original claimants claiming that when their claim was for enhancement to the extent of Rs.65,000/- per sq. mtr., the order of the Reference Court in partly allowing the reference by enhancing the amount only to the extent of Rs.26,048/- was bad. The Cross-Objections have been filed for claiming an additional remaining amount of Rs.38,952/-.
2. The dispute in the present matters is pertaining to land bearing survey no.1/A/2 shown in City Survey part-B bearing Tika Nos.27/15, 27/16 and 27/17 situated near Lalbaug Crossing, Kasba, Vadodara admeasuring 1,28,073 sq. mtrs. equivalent to approximately 53 vighas and 17 vasa. The lands are now bearing new survey nos.371 and 372.
3. Brief facts leading to filing of these proceedings are as under:
3.1 The land in question came to be acquired by the State Government vide notification dated 09.02.2007 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter to be referred to as ‘the Act’ for short). For the acquisition of the said land, the State Government had invoked the urgency clause for the acquisition thereafter. By an award dated 11.12.2008, the Land Acquisition Officer awarded an amount at the rate of Rs.1904/- per sq. mtr. The claimants, aggrieved by the award sought reference under Section 18 of the Act.
3.2 Before the District Court, the claimants claimed an amount of Rs.65,000/- per sq. mtr. By a judgment and award dated 05.03.2022, the Reference Court at Vadodara, granted an amount of Rs.26,048/- per sq. mtr. holding that the market value of the land under acquisition will be Rs.26,048/- per sq. mtr. on the date of Section 4 notification which was published on 09.02.2007. The Reference Court further granted amount of interest/rent/damages to the claimants from 29.11.1991 till 09.02.2007 at the rate of 15% on the ground that the State Government was in possession of the land from 29.11.1991. The Reference Court further passed an order directing the State Authorities to pay interest at the rate of 12% from 09.02.2007 i.e. the date of Section 4 notification till the date of the award i.e. 11.12.2008. A further direction was issued to grant solatium at the rate of 30% on an additional amount of compensation granted to the claimants. Accordingly, the Land Reference Court directed the State Authorities to pay the following amounts:
ii. Rs.65,15,68,766.64 by way of interest at the rate of 12% per annum on additional compensation under Section 23(1A) of the Act from 09.02.2007 i.e. date of Section 4 notification to 11.12.2008 i.e. date of award.
iii. Rs.88,85,02,863.60 by way of solatium of 30% on the amount of additional compensation under Section 23(2) of the Act.
iv. Rs.729,20,94,260.00 by way of interest/rent at the rate of 15% from 29.11.1991 i.e. date on which the State Authorities was alleged to have come into possession of the land in question for the period anterior to Section 4 notification.
In all, the total amount would be Rs.11,79,38,42,102.60.
v. Rs.26,65,50,859.00 was awarded by way of interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the additional compensation for the period of one year from 09.02.2007 (date of Section 4 notification), under Section 28 of the Act.
vi. Rs
Assistant Commissioner, Gadag, Sub- Division
A.P. Housing Board vs. K. Manohar Reddy
Ashrafi & Ors. vs. State of Haryana & Ors.
Ashok Kumar & Anr. v. State of Haryana
Basavva (Smt.) And Ors. v. Spl. Land Acquisition Officer And Ors., (1996) 9 SCC 640
Balwan Singh & Ors. v. Land Acquisition Collector & Anr.
Chandrasekhar (dead) by L.Rs. and Ors. vs. LAO & Anr.
Chimanlal Hargovindas vs Sp. Land Acquisition Officer, Poona
Deputy Director Land Acquisition vs. Malla Atchinaidua And Ors. AIR 2007 SC 740
Executive Engineer, Karnataka Housing Board vs. Land Acquisition Officer
Gulzara Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Ors.
General Manager, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. v. Rameshbhai Jivanbhai Patel
Haryana State Agricultural Market Board and Anr. vs. Krishan Kumar and Ors. (2011) 15 SCC 297
Hindustan Zinc Ltd versus Vijay Singh & Co 1994(1) GLR 161
H.P. Housing Board v. Bharat S. Negi (2004) 2 SCC 184
Kashmir Singh vs. State of Haryana & Ors.
Kanta Devi & Ors. vs. State of Haryana And Anr.
Kiran Tandon v. Allahabad Development Authority. (2004)10 SCC 745”
Krishena Kumar v. Union of India
Kapil Mehra V/S Union of India reported in 2015 (2) SCC 262
Kasturi vs. State of Haryana (2003) 1 SCC 354
Lal Chand vs. Union of India and Another
Land Acquisition Officer-cum-DSWO
Land Acquisition Officer vs. L. Kamalamma (SMT) Dead by LRS and Others
Lal Chand vs. Union of India and Anr. (2009) 15 SCC 769.
L. Kamalamma (SMT) Dead by LRS and Others
Muthavalli of Sha Madhari Diwan Wafk S.J. Syed Zakrudeen vs. Syed Zindasha 2009 (12) SCC 280
Mummidi Apparao (Dead by LR) vs. Nagarjuna Fertilizers & Chemical Ltd.
Major General Kapil Mehra & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr.
Mehrawal Khewalji Trust & Ors. v. State of Punjab
Madishetti Bala Ramul (Dead) By Lrs. v. Land Acquisition Officer
M/s. Orient Paper and Industries Ltd. & Anr. v. State of Orissa AIR 1991 SC 672
Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Gurnam Kaur
Mehrawal Khewalji Trust & Ors. V/s. State of Punjab reported in 2012 (5) SCC 432.
Prestige Lights Limited V. State Bank of India reported in 2007 (8) SCC 449
Revenue Divisional Officer-cum-LAO vs. Shaik Azam Saheb etc.
Raj Kumar V/s. Haryana State - 2007 (7) SCC 609
R.L. Jain (D) by LRs. V. DDA & Others
Sadashiv Shyama Sawant (Dead) through Lrs. & Ors. v. Anita Anant Sawant
Sp. Land Acquisition Officer vs. Korigowda
Sajan V/S State of Maharashtra and Others reported in 2020 (14) SCC 139
Sanjaykumar Singh V/S State of Jharkhand
Santosh Kumari & Ors. vs. State of Haryana
Sajan vs. State of Maharashtra and others (2020) 14 SCC 139
Subh Ram & Ors. vs. State of Haryana & Anr.
Special Tehsildar, L.A. Vishakapatnam vs. Smt.A. Mangala Gowri
Special Tehsildar (LA) PWD Schemes Vijaywada v. M.A. Jabbar AIR 1995 SC 762
Sunder V/s. Union of India reported in 2001 (7) SCC 211
Tejumal Bhojwani v. State of U.P. ((2003)10 SCC 525
Taher Khotoon & Ors. v. Revenue Divisional Officer/Land Acquisition Officer & Ors.
Union of India vs. Dyagala Devmma
Union of India v. Budh Singh & Ors.
Union of India vs Premlata reported in 2022 7 SCC 745;
Union of India v. Ibrahim Uddin
Union of India vs. Shri Ram Mehar and ors. {1973(1) SCC 109}
The court established that compensation for land acquisition must be based on market value evidenced by comparable sales, and interest must be calculated per statutory provisions.
The market value of acquired land should be determined based on the nature of the land, and deductions for development costs should consider the purpose of acquisition. Left-out benefit components ma....
The acquiring authority to award additional interest by way of damages @ 15% per annum from the date when respondents-claimants were dispossessed till the date of notification under Section 4 of Act.
The court upheld the Reference Court's enhanced compensation for acquired land, emphasizing the need for evidence-based valuation while modifying the interest rate to 9% per annum from the date of aw....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.