(1.) ALL these appeals arise out of common impugned judgment and award dated 30.8.1997 rendered by learned Extra Asst.Judge, Surendranagar in land reference cases No.59 to 76 of 1994 whereby the reference Court dismissed all those land reference cases. In the result, the original claimants preferred these appeals.
(2.) CERTAIN agricultural lands owned by the appellants ? claimants situated in the outskirts of village Gedi, Tal.Limbdi, Dist.Surendranagar were proposed to be acquired for irrigation purpose and the notification u/s.4 of the Land Acquisition Act ('the Act', for short) came to be published on 13.4.1991. The Special Land Acquisition Officer conducted inquiry to determine the just and fair amount of compensation and declare award u/s.11 of the Act dated 11.7.1994, whereby the Special Land Acquisition Officer offered compensation at the rate of Rs.8750/- per hectare (87 ps. per sq.mtr.). The appellants ? claimants felt that the amount awarded by way of compensation to them was quite meagre and insufficient and, therefore, applied for references and claimed compensation @ Rs.10000/- per one acre.
(3.) PER contra, Ms.Shachi Mathur, ld.AGP for the respondents No.1 and 2 and Mr.HS Munshaw, ld.advocate for respondent No.3 vehemently opposed these appeals and submitted that the reference Court rightly came to the conclusion that all those reference cases deserved dismissal. That the claimants did not adduce sufficient evidence to show any income derived by them from these lands and for want of evidence, there was no option left to the reference Court, but to dismiss those cases. However, it is submitted that the reference Court came to the conclusion that the lands were new tenure lands and at the same time, the reference Court observed that barring the lands of one of the claimants, namely, Reva Vala, the remaining lands were waste lands, as the other claimants did not cultivate those lands and there is no dispute that till those lands were acquired, no confiscation orders were passed. In the aforesaid background, it is submitted that if the appellants ? claimants feel that they were deprived of from adducing just and sufficient evidence, and if this Court feels that considering the nature of such litigation, sufficient opportunity should be given to the appellants ? claimants to adduce evidence, then necessary orders may be passed.