SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER Vs. MIYA EJAMATBIBEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these appeals arise out of the common impugned judgment and award dated 19-6-2008 rendered by the learned Presiding Officer, F.T.C. No. 1, Mehsana, (for short 'the Reference Court'), in Land Reference Case Nos. 965 to 974 of 2004 (Main L.A.R. No. 965 of 2004), whereby the Reference Court awarded additional amount of compensation to the Respondents - claimants @ Rs. 71-50 ps., per sq.mtr. The Reference Court also awarded statutory additional amount as provided under Section 23(1A) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short 'the Act') as well as solatium under Section 23(2) of the Act. The Reference Court also awarded running interest as contemplated under Section 28 of the Act. The Appellants, who were opponents in the said Land Reference Cases have preferred these appeals. The Respondents are original claimants in the aforesaid land reference case.

(2.) Certain agricultural lands belonging to the Respondents - claimants, situated in the outskirts of village Chhattiyarda, Taluka & District Mehsana, came to be acquired for the public purpose of "Dharoi Canal Project". The lands, which were acquired belonging to the Respondents - claimants, are described in detail in Para 4 of the impugned judgment and award. Notification under Section 4 of the Act was published on 24-12-2002 and the notification under Section 6 of the Act was published on 3-6-2003. The Special Land Acquisition Officer conducted inquiry in L.A.Q. Case No. 88 of 2002 to determine just and fair amount of compensation and delivered his award under Section 11 of the Act on 2-7-2003 and offered the compensation @ Rs. 8-50 ps. per sq.mtr., to the claimants. The Respondents - claimants felt that the amount offered by way of compensation to them was grossly inadequate and insufficient, and therefore, they applied for references and their references were numbered and registered as Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 965 to 974 of 2004 and they claimed compensation @ Rs. 200/- per sq.mtr. Since, all these reference cases arose out of common award rendered by the Special Land Acquisition Officer in L.A.Q. Case No. 88 of 2002, all these reference cases were consolidated and common evidence was recorded. On behalf of the Respondents - claimants, one claimant - Bahelim Imankha Sherkha came to be examined at Exh. 14. The claimants produced extract of revenue records regarding their lands as well as produced copies of previous awards pertaining to the lands of villages Motidau, Pala Vasna and Vishod. The Reference Court, evaluating the oral and documentary evidence on record and especially relying upon the comparable awards, observed that perusing the comparable awards regarding lands of different villages relied upon by the claimants, the compensation which came to be awarded was ranging from Rs. 50/-, Rs. 180/- and Rs. 240/- per sq.mtr., respectively. The Reference Court, therefore, came to the conclusion that in the instant case, the Respondents - claimants were entitled to recover additional amount of compensation @ Rs. 71-50 ps. per sq.mtr. The Special Land Acquisition Officer and the Executive Engineer, Dharoi Canal, who were opponents in the reference cases, felt that the amount awarded by way of compensation by the Reference Court to the Respondents - claimants was excessive and exorbitant, and therefore, filed these appeals.

(3.) Ms. Shachi Mathur, learned A.G.P. representing the Appellants submitted that the impugned judgment and award rendered by the Reference Court are contrary to law and facts on record. Ms. Mathur read over the relevant paras from the impugned judgment and award and submitted that the Reference Court did not properly deal with the previous awards produced before the Reference Court and without assigning any reasons, came to the conclusion that the market value of the lands acquired can conveniently be determined to be Rs. 80/- per sq.mtr., and accordingly, awarded Rs. 71-50 ps. per sq.mtr. As additional amount of compensation. It is submitted that the impugned judgment and award rendered by the Reference Court, are without any reasons and deserve to be set aside.