STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. JAYANTBHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As both the appeals arise from the common judgement, they are being considered simultaneously.

(2.) Both the appeals are directed against the judgement and award passed by the Reference Court in Land Reference Case Nos.63/84 and 64/84, whereby the Reference Court has awarded additional compensation of Rs.2,56,086.10 in Land Reference Case No.63/84 and Rs.67,96,327.50 in land Reference Case No.64/84 and has additionally awarded interest under Section 28 of the Act with the observation of making it applicable from the date on which the possession was taken over of the land in question.

(3.) The short facts are that the lands for the project Sukhi, Unit-I, Baroda were to be acquired at Village Alikherva of Taluka Sankheda, District Baroda under the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' for short). There were two parcels of land; one was land bearing Survey No.206, admeasuring 53 Are and 64 sq. mtrs., whereas another parcel of the land was bearing Survey No.207, admeasuring 13 hectare, 66 Are and 83 sq. mtrs. The possession of the land in contemplation of the proceedings under land acquisition by way of agreement was taken over on 18.2.1971. The Notification under Section 4 of the Act was published on 13.9.1979. The Notification under Section 6 of the Act was published on 2.7.1981. The award was passed under Section 11 of the Act on 27.12.1983 and the Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at Rs.2/- per sq. mtrs. As the claimants were not satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, they raised dispute under section 18 of the Act and demanded compensation of Rs.60/- per sq. mtrs. The Reference Court, at the conclusion of the references, awarded the compensation by fixing the market value of the land at Rs.40/- per sq mtrs., and thereafter awarded additional compensation. The reference Court has also calculated the amount of additional compensation by making deduction of 5% for the land bearing Survey No.206 on the ground that it was new tenure land. The Reference Court declined the benefits of increase under Section 23(1-A) of the Act to the original claimants, but the Reference Court awarded interest from the date of taking over the possession and not from the date of Notification under Section 4 of the Act or the award. Under these circumstances, the present appeals before this Court.