SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER Vs. HANSABEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge in this appeal is to the impugned judgment and award rendered by learned Assistant Judge, Nadiad, on 18.12.1992, in Land Reference Case No.196 of 1989. THE Reference Court by impugned judgment and award determined the market value of the land under acquisition belonging to the respondents-claimants at the rate of Rs.48.20/- per Sqr.Mtr. Since the Land Acquisition Officer had determined and paid compensation at the rate of Rs.4.50/- per Sqr.Mtr., the Reference Court came to the conclusion that the respondents-claimants were entitled to get additional amount of compensation at the rate of Rs.43.70/- per Sqr.Mtr.

(2.) THE agricultural land situated at Mahemdabad bearing Survey No.196/89 in Block No.14/1 and 14/2 admeasuring 6070 Sqr.Mtrs. belonging to the respondents-claimants, proposed to be acquired for the public purpose of construction of houses for Gujarat Housing Board. Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as ?the Act?) came to be published on 37.07.1985 and the notification under Section 6 of the Act was published on 21.05.1986. THE Special Land Acquisition Officer conducted inquiry to determine just and proper amount of compensation to be payable to the claimants. THE Special Land Acquisition Officer by his order dated 31.08.1988, awarded the compensation to the claimants at the rate of Rs.4.50 per Sqr.Mtr. THE claimants felt that the amount awarded to them was highly inadequate and insufficient , and therefore, applied for reference and claimed compensation at the rate of Rs.100/- per Sqr.Mtr.

(3.) MR.Gurjar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the State, at the outset, submitted that the Reference Court committed serious error in blindly relying upon the oral evidence of the claimants regarding income allegedly derived by them from the acquired land. He submitted that the claimants in support of their deposition about the income, which they derived from this land by way of agricultural operation, did not produce any documentary evidence to show purchase of seeds , purchase of fertilizer, bill or voucher showing sale of agricultural products etc.