Compensation for land acquisition must be based on current market value, informed by recent sale transactions and relevant valuation reports.

JUDGMENT :

Hemant M. Prachchhak, J.

1. All these appeals involve identical and similar issues arising out of common facts and circumstances. Therefore, with the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. Present appeals are filed against the common judgment and award dated 29.5.2010 passed by learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Mehsana (hereinafter be referred to as the "Reference Court") in Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 958 of 2003 to 973 of 2003, whereby the Reference Court has partly allowed the said Reference Cases and awarded additional amount compensation of Rs.34.85 ps. per square meter over and above the compensation awarded by Special Land Acquisition Officer along with other statutory benefits in favour of the appellants of all the First Appeals.

3. The facts giving rise to present appeals are that the competent authority under the LAND ACQUISITION ACT had acquired lands of the claimants for public purpose to make Canal situated at Village Kamana, Taluka Visnagar, District Mehsana. For that the notification under Section 4 of the Act had been published in 2 daily newspaper on 17.07.2002 and even in village Kamana on 19.7.2002 and the notification under Section 6 of the Act was publlished in newspaper on 18.11.2002 and in village Kamana on 01.12.2002. After following due procedure and after hearing the concerned parties, the Special Land Acquisition Officer has passed an award dated 13.1.2003 under Section 11(1) of the Act and the possession of the land was taken on 8.8.2001 by consent of the claimants and the Special Land Acquisition Officer has fixed the market value of the lands at Rs.8.10 N.P. per square meter.

3.1 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said award all the claimants filed Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 958 of 2003 to 973 of 2003 before the Reference Court.

3.2 The Reference Court after hearing both the parties and after evaluating the evidence placed on record has framed the issues at Exh.9 referred in paragraph No.5 of the judgment and award, which reads as under:-

1. Whether the applicants/claimants proves that compensation awarded is inadequate?

2. If ayes, what additional compensation the applicants/claimants are entitled to?

3. Whether reference cases filed within limitation provisions under Section 18 of the Act?

3.3 The Reference Court answered the said issues in paragraph No.6. Thereafter, Reference Court considered oral as well as documentary evidence of both the sides which read as under:-

"ORAL EVIDENCE:

(a) Applicants witness No.1- Babuji Ravaji Thakor applicant of L.A.R.No.958/03 has been examined on oath at Exh.55, on behalf of the applicants and the applicant's side has submitted closing pursis at Exh. 74. The same witness had been examined earlier at Exh.36.

(b) Opponent's witness:- The opponents side has not repeated the witness instead, the opponent side has examined fresh witness namely Shri Sagardan Abheysinh Zibha, Deputy Collector, CIPU Project, Palanpur at Exh.73. Earlier Government had examined Shri Rameshchandra Amarsinhbhai Thakkar, Deputy Mamlatdar, Office of CIPU Project, LAQ Officer for CIPU Project at Exh.38.

(A) Documents produced by the applicants:-

Again, applicants have produced following documents:-

(1) A letter written by office of Town Planning office under the information asked by H.P.Patel dated 01.01.2010 at Exh.49

(2) Valuation Report prepared by Town Planning Office, Mehsana dated 26.11.1998 for the land survey No. 1252 paiki 505.85 sq.mtr of village Kamana produced at Exh.50.

(3) Valuation Report prepared by Town Planning Office, Mehsana dated 26.11.1998 at Exh.51.

(4) Report of District Valuation Committee dated 26.11.1998 at Exh.52.

(5) Copy of Valuation Report prepared by Town Planning Office of Survey No. 1252 paiki of village: Kamana 14.07.2000 at Exh.53.

(6) Valuation Report prepared by Town Planning Office on 14.07.2000 at Exh.54

(7) A note of meeti