GOSAI MANJULABEN KALYANSINH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three appeals arise out of a common judgment and award rendered by learned Jt. District Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, Bharuch on 16.3.2005 in land reference case Nos. 1995 to 1997 of 1998 whereby the reference Court determined the market value of the lands in acquisition @ Rs. 600/- per RA in case of irrigated land and Rs. 400/- per RA in case of non-irrigated land. There is no dispute that the notification Under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act ('Act', for short) came to be published on dated 29.3.1996 and the notification Under Section 6 of the Act came to be published on 31.5.1997, the land acquisition Officer conducted land acquisition case No. 1997 of 1998 and determined Rs. 330/- per RA of irrigated land and Rs. 220/- per RA for non-irrigated land Under Section 11 of the Act. The three claimants felt that the amount offered by the land acquisition Officer was quite inadequate and less and, therefore, preferred reference cases Under Section 18 of the Act, which came to be numbered and registered as land reference case Nos. 1995 to 1997 of 1998 before the reference Court.

(2.) There is also no dispute that the reference Court did not record any oral evidence or permitted either of the parties to produce any documentary evidence and the reference Court ascertained the market value @ Rs. 600 per RA for irrigated land and Rs. 400 per RA for non-irrigated land solely on the basis of the award passed by the land acquisition Officer Under Section 11 of the Act. The said judgment and award is under challenge in these group of appeals.

(3.) Mr. Patel, learned Counsel for the Appellants submitted that the impugned judgment and order rendered by the reference Court is not only improper, but is illegal. It is submitted that in absence of any evidence worth the name adduced by either of the parties, the reference Court determined the market value of the lands under acquisition on the basis of the award passed by the land acquisition Officer Under Section 11 of the Act. Thus, the market value determined by the reference Court is based only on conjectures and presumptions.