CHAMPABEN ARJANBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS common question of law and facts arise in both these appeals and they arise out of common judgment and award passed by the learned Reference Court, they are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

(2.) BOTH these First Appeals under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act r/w Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure have been preferred by the appellants herein original claimants challenging the impugned judgment and award dated 27.2.1984 passed by the learned Assistant Judge (Reference Court) passed in Land Reference Case Nos.1 of 1988 and 2 of 1988 in not awarding full claim as prayed for and in awarding the compensation for the land in question considering the market price of the land in question at Rs.2900/- per acre only.

(3.) BOTH these First Appeals are opposed by Ms. Pathak, learned AGP appearing on behalf of the respondent State. It is submitted that considering the fact that the sale transaction produced at Exh.20 relied upon by the claimants was in favour of her own brother and which was just prior to issuance of the Notification under Section 4 of the Act, the learned Reference Court has rightly not believed the same and learned Reference Court has rightly not relied upon the same while determining the market price of the land in question. It is submitted that on appreciation of evidence, learned Reference Court has rightly held the market price of the land in question at Rs.2900 per acre. It is further submitted that in view of the recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Karnal Improvement Trust Vs. Sumitra Devi (Smt) (Dead) By LRS and Another reported in (2008) 12 SCC 423, as in the present case the award was declared by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Collector) on 21.5.1980 i.e. much prior to Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984, the claimants are not entitled to to benefits under Sections 23(1-A), 23(2) and 30 of the Land Acquisition Act (Amendment) Act, 1984. It is further submitted that similarly the claimants are not entitled to benefit of Section Sections 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984. By making above submissions and relying upon the above decision, it is requested to dismiss the present First Appeals.