GENERAL MANAGER ONGC Vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in these two appeals is to the common judgment and award dated 4.8.1999 rendered by learned Asst.Judge, Mehsana in Land Reference Case Nos.1795 and 1796 of 1993.

(2.) Certain agricultural lands belonging to the respondent claimant situated in the outskirts of village Khambhel, Tal.Chanasma, Dist.Mehsana, came to be temporarily acquired by the appellant ONGC Ltd. The Special Land Acquisition Officer by his award dated 27.12.1991 assessed the rent of the temporarily acquired lands at the rate of 80 ps.per sq.mtr. The respondent claimant felt that the amount offered by way of rent was quite inadequate and insufficient and, therefore, applied for references u/s.35(3) of the Land Acquisition Act ('the Act', for short). The reference Court after considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the rent offered to the respondent claimant was quite inadequate and insufficient and, therefore, awarded compensation by fixing the rent @ Rs.2.70 ps.per sq.mtr. Thus, the additional amount of rent was awarded @ Rs.1.90 ps.per sq.mtr. The reference Court also granted interest as contemplated u/s.28 of the Act and ordered that the respondent claimant was entitled to interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of taking possession till one year and, thereafter, @ 15% p.a. till the realisation of the amount from the date of the award or from the date of taking possession, whichever was earlier in time. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award rendered by the reference Court, the original opponent No.2 General Manager, ONGC Ltd., Mehsana preferred these appeals.

(3.) Mr.Vm Vyas, ld.advocate for Mr.RH Mehta, ld.advocate for the appellant ONGC Ltd. submitted that the impugned judgment and award is contrary to law and facts on record. It is submitted that the bare perusal of the impugned judgment and award would reveal that the reference Court conducted the case, as if it pertained to permanent acquisition. That in the instant case, the provisions contained u/s.35 of the Act are attracted, as admittedly in the instant case, the acquisition was temporary acquisition.