Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2026 DIGILAW 149 (GUJ)

General Manager v. Patel Kaushik Babubhai

2026-03-05

DEVAN M.DESAI

body2026
JUDGMENT : DEVAN M. DESAI, J. 1. Present appeals are filed by the appellant - O.N.G.C. under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act read with Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter, referred to as ‘the Code’) challenging the judgment and award dated 27.02.2009 passed in L.A.R. Nos. 1853 to 1855 of 2003 by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (5 th Fast Track Judge), Mehsana (hereinafter referred to as the "Reference Court"). The Reference Court has partly allowed the said Reference and awarded compensation of Rs.104/- per sq. mtr. over and above the amount of compensation of Rs.21/- already awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. 2. Heard learned advocate Ms. K.J. Brahmbhatt for the appellant, learned advocate Ms. Shivani Trivedi for respondent No.1 and learned AGP Mr. Chirag Upadhyay for the respondent – State. 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows: 3.1 The lands situated at village Meda Adaraj, Tal. Kadi, Dist. Mehsana were acquired for the purpose of Drilling No. JRFN by the appellant - O.N.G.C. for L.A.R. Nos. 1853 to 1855 of 2003. Notification under Section 4 of the Act was published on 21.01.1999 and under Section 6 was published on 05.02.2001. The Land Acquisition Officer, after issuing notice to the claimants and after hearing the claimants and considering the evidence led by the claimants passed an award dated 17.06.2003 awarding compensation at the rate of Rs.21/- per sq. mtr. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the award of the Land Acquisition Officer, the claimants filed reference proceedings claiming compensation at the rate of Rs.125/- per sq. mtr. After considering the relevant materials and after considering the oral as well as the documentary evidence, the Reference Court partly allowed references and awarded Rs.104/- per sq. mtr. over and above, the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. 3.2 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and awards passed by the Reference Court the, appellant - O.N.G.C. has filed present First Appeals. 4. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the Reference Court has not considered the facts while determining the market value in its true and proper spirit. 3.2 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and awards passed by the Reference Court the, appellant - O.N.G.C. has filed present First Appeals. 4. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the Reference Court has not considered the facts while determining the market value in its true and proper spirit. It is also submitted that the Division Bench of this Court, vide judgment and order dated 06.08.2015 passed in First Appeal No. 3531 of 2011 with Cross Objection No. 116 of 2012 with respect to the adjoining village Merda, has fixed the value at Rs. 44/- per sq. mtr. It is also submitted that the Reference Court has awarded a very high amount in present Appeals without considering the said fact. 4.1 Learned advocate for the appellant has referred to and relied upon the observations made by the Division Bench of this Court in paragraph No. 5 of the above referred judgment and order, which read as under: "5. This court has gone through the documentary evidence placed on record alongwith the award of the reference court. The reference court has relied upon awards passed with respect of acquisition of lands of nearby villages. On basis of the said award, the reference court considered the compensation of around Rs. 69/- per sq. mt keeping in mind the notification under section 4 dated 05.04.2003 in that case. In the present case, the section 4 notification was issued on 31.12.1998. Considering the difference and time gap of around four years and four months and keeping the price at Rs. 69/- intact, we are of the view that the reference court ought to have arrived at compensation considering 40% decrease in price which comes to Rs. 44/- on the basis of reducing value method. Thus, the claimants are entitled to get Rs. 40/- per sq. mtr as additional compensation over and above Rs. 4/- per sq. mtr already granted by the Land Acquisition Officer." additional compensation over and above Rs. 4/- per sq. mtr already granted by the Land Acquisition Officer." 4.2 Learned advocate for the appellant has referred to and relied upon the decision of the coordinate bench of this Court dated 18.03.2024 passed in First Appeal Nos. 4044 of 2009 and allied matters and submitted that in the said decision, the learned Single Judge has considered the value of the land at Rs.75/- per sq. mtr. 4044 of 2009 and allied matters and submitted that in the said decision, the learned Single Judge has considered the value of the land at Rs.75/- per sq. mtr. and therefore, present Appeals deserve to be allowed. 4.3 Learned advocate for the appellant has further relied upon the decision of this Court in First Appeal No. 1612 of 2009 and allied matters, pertaining to an adjoining Village Merda, Tal. Kadi, Dist. Mahesana wherein the impugned judgment and award dated 17.09.2001 passed in L.A.R. Nos. 5371, 5372 and 5385 of 2003 by the learned Refernce Court was remanded back. 5. As against that, learned advocate for the respondents – claimants has submitted that the respondent – original claimants have lost their lands way back in 1999 and since long they are fighting for the compensation. Learned advocate for the responednts has relied upon the decision of this Court dated 06.02.2013 passed in First Appeal Nos. 3682 of 2012 and allied matters, wherein the appellant corporation has accepted the award and entered into settlement with the respondents and submitted that now the corporation cannot take different stand, as the corporation has accepted the amount awarded by the Reference Court. It is also submitted that in another group of the references, for the adjoining village Merda, the Reference Court has, vide judgment and award dated 06.08.2013, passed in L.A.R. Nos. 1746 and 1747 of 2009, after considering the earlier land reference cases and after considering the facts and submissions of both the sides, awarded Rs.137/- per sq. mtr. It is submitted that even in another group of references for the adjoining village Merda i.e. L.A.R. Nos. 1007 of 2013 and allied group of appeals, the Reference Court has awarded Rs.203.69 paisa. per sq. mtr. vide judgment and award dated 06.02.2014, wherein the date of notification under Section 4 was of February 2009. 5.1 Learned advocate for the respondents – claimants has submitted that in another decision of the adjoining village Merda under L.A.R. Nos. 1121 of 2011 and allied references, the Reference Court has awarded an additional amount of Rs.76.50 paisa. per sq. mtr. and in reference case No. 5373 of 2000 for the adjoining village Merda, the Reference Court has awarded an amount of Rs.100/- per sq. mtr. 1121 of 2011 and allied references, the Reference Court has awarded an additional amount of Rs.76.50 paisa. per sq. mtr. and in reference case No. 5373 of 2000 for the adjoining village Merda, the Reference Court has awarded an amount of Rs.100/- per sq. mtr. and the same was also accepted by the corporation and not challenged further and therefore, under such circumstances, the present Appeals deserve to be dismissed, since the subsequent decision of the Reference Court, the amount was awarded on very higher side. 6. I have perused the materials available on record and relevant documents and considered the submissions of learned advocates for the parties. Perused record and proceedings. 7. It appears that in the present Appeals, the land acquisition reference cases were decided on 27.02.2009. Meaning thereby, all the subsequent awards passed by the reference are decided later on and therefore, the same were not produced before the Reference Court. All these subsequent events are required to be pointed out before the Reference Court but unfortunately, the decision in the present appeals is prior thereto and therefore, all these subsequent events are required to be produced before the concerned Reference Court, so that the Reference Court can decide the impugned references after considering all these materials including decision of this Court, which are subsequent to the effect. 8. In view of the above, it is appropriate to send the matters back to the concerned Reference Court for a fresh decision to be taken by the Reference Court, after considering all these facts. 9. Hence, present matters are remitted back to the Reference Court for fresh decision in the Reference Cases. It is open for all the concerned parties to raise all the contentions available in law and the same shall be decided by the Reference Court without influenced by earlier award. Since, the matter is of 1999 therefore, learned Reference Court shall decide the impugned references as expeditiously as possible and preferably within four months from the date of receipt of copy of present order. It is also observed that all the concerned parties shall cooperate to the concerned Reference Court and without taking any unnecessary adjournments, proceed with the matter in accordance with law. The Reference Court is also directed to decide the reference cases after considering all the relevant materials agitated before it. It is also observed that all the concerned parties shall cooperate to the concerned Reference Court and without taking any unnecessary adjournments, proceed with the matter in accordance with law. The Reference Court is also directed to decide the reference cases after considering all the relevant materials agitated before it. 9.1 The appellant has deposited the awarded amount of which, part is withdrawn by the claimants and remaining amount is lying in fixed deposit. Therefore, it is directed that the said amount will continue to remain in fixed deposit subject to final determination by the Reference Court pursuant to present order. 10. All these appeals are disposed of accordingly. The impugned judgment and awards dated 27.02.2009 passed in L.A.R. Nos. 1853 to 1855 of 2003 by the Reference Court are hereby quashed and set aside. Direct service is permitted. Record and proceedings, if received, be sent back to the concerned Reference Court forthwith.