FA/106220/2002 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 1062 of 2002 To FIRST APPEAL No. 1069 of 2002 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 ? ========================================================= PATEL JAYANTIBHAI RANCHHODDAS - Appellant(s) Versus SP.LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER & 1 - Defendant(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR AJ PATEL for Appellant(s) : 1, MR D.R. CHAUHAN AGP for Defendant(s) : 1 - 2. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 27/08/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. These appeals are directed against the common judgment and award dated 12.07.2001 passed by the learned 6th Jt. Civil Judge (S.D.), Mehsana in L.A.R. Case Nos.252/1998 to 258/1998 & 260/1998 FA/106220/2002 2/3 JUDGMENT whereby, the said reference cases were partly allowed. 2.0 The facts in brief are as under; 2.1 The respondent – State proposed to acquire the lands situated in Village Karannagar, Taluka Kadi, belonging to the appellants – original claimants, under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for the purpose of constructing the Narmada Canal. On completion of the legal formalities, the S.L.A.O., by award dated 21.09.1992, granted compensation @ Rs.3.90 per sq. metre. 2.2 Being dissatisfied by the said award, the claimants preferred applications before the respondent – S.L.A.O. requesting to refer the issue to the competent Court for adjudication, which, ultimately, came to be referred to the Court below by way of references. 2.3 The reference Court, after appreciating the entire evidence on record, partly allowed the reference cases by awarding additional compensation @ Rs.36.00 per sq. metre. Hence, these appeals for enhancement of the amount of compensation. 3. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents on record. The main contention raised by the appellants – original claimants, is that though they had produced an award passed in cases of lands belonging to the same Village being L.A.R. Case Nos. 3191/1993 to 3205/1993 vide Exhibit – 10, the reference Court has not considered the same. 4. The Notification u/s. 4 of the Act, in the aforesaid reference cases, FA/106220/2002 3/3 JUDGMENT was published on 22.06.1990 whereas, in the present case, it was published on 19.07.1990, i.e. after a period of about one month. The award passed in the aforesaid reference cases was carried in appeal before this Court in First Appeal Nos.1521/2000 to 1535/2000 dated 16.10.2001 and First Appeal Nos.1211/2003 to 1220/2003 dated 21.01.2001 and this Court disposed of the said group of appeals by awarding total compensation of Rs.42/- per sq. metre vide order dated 16.10.2001. 5. It is not in dispute that the lands in question are situated in the same Village in respect of which this Court has awarded total compensation of Rs.42/- per sq. metre. Now, even if we do not take any increase for the one month period, the original claimants would be even otherwise entitled for Rs.42/- per sq. metre in view of the decision rendered by this Court in the above group of First Appeals. The learned AGP for the respondent – State is not in a position to dispute the aforesaid proposition of law. 6. In above view of the matter, I am of the opinion that ends of justice would be met if the original claimants are awarded total compensation of Rs.42/- per sq. metre for their acquired lands. Orders accordingly. The impugned award of the reference Court stands modified accordingly. The rest part of the impugned award stands confirmed. The appeals are allowed to the aforesaid extent. No order as to costs. [K. S. JHAVERI, J.] Pravin/*