SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 12828

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Sunita Agarwal, CJ, D.N. Ray, J
M/S HPCL MITTAL PIPELINE LTD.V/sVAKTABHAI HIRABHAI PATEL
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13605 of 2025 | CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR AMENDMENT) NO. 1 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Vidita D Jayswal
For the Respondents: Krishna G Rawal

The court examined whether compensation under the Petroleum and Mineral Pipeline Act, 1962, was correctly calculated as 10% of market value and whether the appropriate sale exemplar was used to determine land value.

Headnote:(A) Land Acquisition - Compensation Calculation - Payment of compensation under Section 10(4) of the Petroleum and Mineral Pipeline (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962, should be calculated at 10% of the market value of the land rather than on the total area of the land. (Para 2)

(B) Market Value Determination - Sale Exemplars - The use of sale exemplars from a period beyond three years from the date of acquisition may be improper if more relevant awards in the vicinity are available for consideration. (Para 2)

Issues: Whether the District Judge erred in calculating compensation on the total area of land and in selecting the sale exemplar for determining market value.

ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)

ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATION:-

The Civil Application for amendment in the description of the petitioner herein is hereby allowed. Let the necessary incorporation be made within a period of three days from today.

ORDER IN MAIN MATTER:-

Having considered the submissions of Ms. Vidita D. Jayswal, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and perused the record, noticing that the acquisition of the land in question was under the Petroleum and Mineral Pipeline (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 and it seems that the learned District Judge, while determining the market value of the land in question had calculated compensation on the total area of the land in question ignoring the provisions of Section 10 (4) of the Act, 1962 which provide for payment of compensation to the owner calculated at 10% of the market value of the land on the date of the notification under Section 3 (1). There are issues with regard to the enhancement of compensation on the ground that an award dated 20.10.2003 under Section 10 of the Act, 1962, in respect of the land in the vicinity has been ignored by the learned District Judge in enhancing the market value of the land in question considering the sale exemplar of the year 2009, beyond three years from the date of acquisition.

The matter requires consideration. Let a notice be issued to the respondent no. 1 through Speed post/R.P.A.D. returnable on 23.06.2026. Necessary steps be taken within a period of one week.

Till the next date of listing, the effect and operation of the judgment and order dated 05.02.2024 passed by the learned District Judge shall be kept in abeyance, subject to the condition that the entire compensation determined under the order impugned is deposited before the Court concerned within a period of four weeks from today.

It is provided that in case such deposits are made, the same shall be invested in a Fixed Deposit interest bearing account of the Nationalized Bank.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top