FA/487020/2007 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 4870 of 2007 With FIRST APPEAL No. 4871 of 2007 To FIRST APPEAL No. 4873 of 2007 With FIRST APPEAL No. 2623 of 2008 To FIRST APPEAL No. 2635 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: 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 ? ========================================================= SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER & 1 - Appellant(s) Versus HUSENMIYA CHANDMIYA MALEK - Defendant(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR SUNIT SHAH G.P. With MS TRUSHA PATEL, MR HEMANT MAKWANA AND MR D.R. CHAUHAN AGPs for Appellant(s) : 1 - 2. MR KM SHETH for Defendant(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 04/08/2008 FA/487020/2007 2/3 JUDGMENT ORAL JUDGMENT 1.0 These appeals are directed against the judgment and award dated 31.03.2006 passed by the learned 4th Addl. Sr. Civil Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) in Land Acquisition Cases No. 691/2003 to 695/2003 and Land Acquisition Cases No. 795/2003 to 807/2003. 2.0 The appellant – State proposed to acquire the lands situated in the sim of Village Kathwada, Taluka Daskroi, District Ahmedabad for the purpose of constructing the Narmada Canal. After completing all the legal formalities, the Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation of Rs.10.50/- per sq. metre for the acquired lands. 2.1 Being dissatisfied by the said amount, the claimants preferred applications before the authority requesting to refer the issue to the competent Court, which, ultimately, came to be referred to the Court below by way of references. The reference Court, after hearing the parties and after considering the evidence on record, allowed the references. Hence, these appeals. 3.0 Learned counsel for the appellant – State contented that the Notification u/s. 4 of the Act in the earlier matter was published on 17.03.2001 whereas, in the present case, it has been published on 24.08.2001 and therefore, 5% deduction is required to be made as there is a difference of six months. FA/487020/2007 3/3 JUDGMENT 4.0 Learned counsel for the respondent is not in a position to dispute the above proposition of law. 5.0 I find merits in the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant – State since the Notification u/s. 4 in the present case, was issued after a gap of six months. In view of the above, the claimants will be entitled for Rs.65.50 per sq. metre over and above the amount awarded by the appellant – authority. In all the claimants were granted Rs.79.50 and if 5% deduction is done, then it would come to around Rs.4/-. Therefore, the claimants will be entitled for a total amount of Rs.75.50 per sq. metre. Since the claimants have already been awarded Rs.10.50 per sq. metre, they will be entitled for an additional amount of Rs.65/- per sq. metre for their acquired lands. 6.0 Accordingly, the appeals are allowed. The impugned award of the reference Court is modified to the extent that the claimants will be entitled for additional compensation @ Rs.65/- per sq. metre instead of what has been awarded by the Court below. The rest part of the impugned award stands confirmed. The appeals stand disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. R & P to be sent back to the trial Court concerned forthwith. [K. S. JHAVERI, J.] Pravin/*