Partly allowed

Special Land Acquisition Officer v. Keshavlal Dahyabhai

Gujarat HC3 Feb 2012FA/250/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This First Appeal contesting an award of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act was allowed partly. The High Court modified the additional compensation, reducing the addition from 10% to 8% on the amount of Rs. 168/-, resulting in a total compensation of Rs. 232 per sq. meter instead of Rs. 252/-.

What did the court decide?

First Appeal allowed partly; Additional compensation modified to Rs. 232/- per sq. meter; Amount ordered to be deposited within six weeks.

Special Land Acquisition Officer Vs Keshavlal Dahyabhai — Land Acquisition | Gujarat HC (2012)

¶1

FA/250/2012

¶2

1/3

¶3

JUDGMENT

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶5

FIRST APPEAL No. 250 of 2012

¶6

For Approval and Signature:

¶7

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA

¶8

=========================================

¶9

1^{Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be}

¶10

allowed to see the judgment ?

¶11

2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

¶12

3^{Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy} of the judgment ?

¶13

Whether this case involves a substantial question

¶14

4 of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?

¶15

5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?

¶16

=========================================

¶17

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER & 1

¶18

Versus

¶19

KESHAVLAL DAHYABHAI & 9

¶20

=========================================

¶21

Appearance :

¶22

MR. P.P.BANAJI, AGP for Appellant(s) : 1 - 2. MR YATIN SONI for Defendant(s) : 1 - 4,6 - 10. None for Defendant(s) : 5,

¶23

=========================================

¶24

CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA

¶25

Date : 03/02/2012

¶26

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶27

The present First Appeal has been filed by the Appellants under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act read with Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure being aggrieved with the impugned judgment and award of the Reference Court, i.e. learned

¶28

FA/250/2012

¶29

2/3

¶30

JUDGMENT

¶31

Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gandhinagar in LAR No.774 of 1998 dated 25.9.2008 on the grounds set out in the memo of Appeal inter alia that the Reference Court has erred in awarding additional compensation without appreciating the quality or the fertility of the land acquired as well as development of the area. It is also contended that the Reference Court has not assigned any cogent and convincing reason while deciding the market price prevailing at the time of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act. Learned AGP has also submitted that the addition of 10% is on higher side and therefore the present Appeal Appeal may be Admitted.

¶32

Learned Advocate Mr. Yatin Soni for the Respondent has submitted that in another village near Chiloda, this court has passed an order while deciding First Appeal No.42 of 2012 declining to interfere with the order of the Reference Court. Learned Advocate Mr. Soni therefore submitted that therefore the order is just and proper.

¶33

Alternatively, it was submitted that instead of addition of 10%, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it may be taken at 8% since the matter is old and it is decided at the admission stage which would serve the purpose, and therefore, considering this aspect, it is desirable to dispose of this First Appeal as it would also save the cost and interest of the Appellants.

¶34

In the circumstances, without going into the further details, the

¶35

FA/250/2012

¶36

3/3

¶37

JUDGMENT

¶38

present First Appeal deserves to be allowed partly to the extent of allowing the award that instead of addition of 10% it should be made 8% on the amount of Rs,168/- which has been accepted by the court in earlier litigation, for which the reference is made.

¶39

Therefore, considering the previous judgment and taking the amount at Rs.168/- the further addition of 8% per year would come to Rs.235, less Rs.3/-, i.e. Rs.232/- . Therefore, the amount of total compensation should be taken at Rs.232/- per sq. meter instead of Rs.252/- as per the award of the Reference Court.

¶40

With the aforesaid observations, the present First Appeal stands allowed to the aforesaid extent of modification in the additional compensation and the additional compensation therefore comes to Rs.232/-.

¶41

The present First Appeal therefore stands allowed to the aforesaid extent only.

¶42

The awarded amount is ordered to be deposited within a period of six weeks.

¶43

This may not be treated as precedent as it is considered on the basis of the facts of the case only.

¶44

(Rajesh H. Shukla,J)

¶45

Jayanti*

Special Land Acquisition Officer v. Keshavlal Dahyabhai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Special Land Acquisition Officer v. Keshavlal Dahyabhai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bank of India Vs Anjali Textiles

Spl Land Acq Officer Vs H/O Vastabhai Naththubha, Babubhai Vastabhai

Jagdishbhai G. Shah Vs Heirs of Bijalbhai H. Nai

Sujansinh S Singh Vs E.S.I. Corporation

Special Land Acquisition Officer Vs Dawoodbhai Musabhai

Special Land Acquisition Officer Vs Dawoodbhai Musabhai