LAWS(GJH)-2011-8-101

BALUSINGH HEMATAJI RATHOD Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On August 02, 2011
BALUSINGH HEMATAJI RATHOD Appellant
V/S
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals are directed against the common judgment and award rendered in Land Reference Case Nos.144 of 1996 and 145 of 1986 under section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') on 02.02.1989 by the learned Assistant Judge, Sabarkantha, Himatnagar whereby the compensation is fixed at Rs.15/sq.mtr. plus statutory benefits of interest and solatium. As common question of law and facts arise in both the appeals and as the same set of evidence is adduced before the Reference Court, both the appeals are disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) THE short facts of the case are that the land under acquisition is located at Village Pipalodi, Tal. Himatnagar, Dist. Sabarkantha. Notifications under section 4 of the Act was published on 02.11.1978 and under section 6 of the Act was published on 26.10.1981. THE appellants/original claimants appeared before the Land Acquisition Officer and after considering the evidence adduced before him, the Land Acquisition Officer passed an award under section 11 of the Act on 17.04.1986 and awarded compensation at Rs.11/sq.mtr. for land bearing Survey No.42, at Rs.9/sq.mtr. for land bearing Survey No.43, Rs.7/sq.mtr. for land bearing Survey No.45 and Rs.6/sq.mtr. for land bearing Survey No.46. Being dissatisfied with the said award the appellants/original claimants raised a dispute as contemplated under section 18 of the Act, which ultimately came to be referred to the Reference Court for adjudication and was numbered as Reference Case Nos.144 of 1986 and 145 of 1986. As per the appellants / original claimants the compensation was required to be paid at Rs.100/sq.mtr. THE Reference Court ultimately passed the above referred impugned judgment and award dated 02.02.1989. Under these circumstances, the present appeals before this Court.

(3.) MR.Patel further submitted that the Reference Court has wrongly deducted the amount towards government charges to the tune of 5%. Relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Babu Govind Gavate, AIR 1996 SC 904 it was submitted that the Reference Court has totally ignored the law laid down by the Apex Court and on that count also the impugned judgment and award is bad.