FA/420820/2006 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 4208 of 2006 With CIVIL APPLICATION NO.12807 OF 2006 HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ====================================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ====================================================== OIL & NATURAL GAS CORPN LTD - Appellant(s) Versus SOLANKI NARANJI BABUJI & 2 - Defendant(s) ===================================================== Appearance : M/S TRIVEDI & GUPTA for Appellant(s) : 1, MR AJ PATEL for Defendant(s) : 1, GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Defendant(s) : 2 - 3. ====================================================== CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 21/08/2008 FA/420820/2006 2/4 JUDGMENT ORAL JUDGMENT 1. This appeal at the instance of Oil and Natural Gas Corporation, the Acquiring Body, under section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act read with section 96 of Civil Procedure Code is against the judgment and award dated 5th 5th February 2005 passed by learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Mehsana in Land Acquisition Reference No.2345 of 2003,whereby the learned Judge, whereby the learned Judge passed the following order: “The land reference case No.2345/2003 preferred by the claimant under the provisions of section 35(3) of the Land Acquisition Act is hereby partly allowed. The amount of compensation for the loss of income from the wellowned by the claimant which is specifically described and stated at page 4 of the award Exh.2 at Rs.10,000/- per year, as on the date of acquisition of land in the year 1985. The opponents shall pay the amount of compensation to the claimant from the date of taking possession by the opponent no.2 ONGC. It is hereby further ordered that the opponent shall pay the amount of compensation with increase at the rate of 10% for the period of three years. The 10% of increased amount in compensation shall be calculated on the amount of last preceding three years, at the interval of every three years period. Hence the amount of compensation fixed at Rs.10,000/- is for the initial period of first three years, from the date of taking possession of the land of the claimant. The 10% increased shall be calculated on the said amount for the subsequent period of three years and thereafter at the interval of every three years period, the amount of compensation shall be calculated as per above order of 10% increase. FA/420820/2006 3/4 JUDGMENT It is hereby further ordered and directed to the opponents that the amount of compensation fixed as per above order shall be paid to the claimant with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. From the period when it is due to the claimant as per above order. The amount of compensation paid to the claimant as per order in LAQ case No.277/84 from the year 1985 till today shall be deducted from the amount which is required to be paid to the claimant as per above order. The opponent shall pay Rs.5000/- by way of cost to the claimant and the opponent shall bear their own respective cost of the present proceedings.” 2. The State had acquired certain land on temporary basis of the original claimants under section 35 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. After following procedure the Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.700/- per year. Feeling aggrieved by the said decision the claimants filed references before the learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Mehsana who awarded Rs.10,000/- per year. It is against the said award the present appeals have been filed. 3. Learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that the Reference Court has committed an error in awarding higher amount in view of the fact that the very same claimant has earlier preferred a reference being LAQ No.1017/87 and therefore the same is prohibited under Oder 2 Rule 2 of CPC. 4. Learned Advocate for the respondent submitted that though it is a second reference, the fact remains that the claimant could not claim certain benefits in the earlier reference. He submitted that at the most it FA/420820/2006 4/4 JUDGMENT could be an amendment and therefore the Reference Court was justified in passing the award. 5. Having heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties, there is no dispute on the fact that the claimant has filed a second reference being LAQ No.1017/87. Having already filed a reference it is not open to the claimants to file another claim application even if it is for part of the claim. The defense put forward by the learned Advocate for the respondents that it is only an amendment is misconceived and cannot be accepted. This Court is, therefore, of the view that the Reference Court has committed an error in accepting the second reference and therefore the impugned award deserves to be quashed. 5. In the premises aforesaid the judgement and award dated 5th February 2005 passed by the learned Civil Judge (S.D.) Mehsana in Land Acquisition Reference No.2345 of 2003 is quashed and set aside. Appeal is allowed accordingly. 6. Since the main appeal has been disposed of the above civil application would not survive and is accordingly disposed of.Rule is discharged with no order as to costs. [K.S. JHAVERI, J.] ar