SECOND ADDITIONAL SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, COLLECTOR OFFIC, GHEEKANTA, AHMEDABAD Vs. LAGHUBHAI NANUBHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These 8 appeals under sec. 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 , (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), filed by the Land Acquisition authorities, arise out of the common judgement and Awards made by the learned Assistant Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Ahmedabad in Land Acquisition Cases No. 9/91, 8/91, 10/91, 11/91, 12/91, 13/91,14/91 and 15/91 respectively. The lands situated in Umrala, Tal. Dhandhuka which belonged to the respondents in all these appeals were acquired for the public purpose of constructing Shitla lake. Strange as it may seem though, the possession of the lands was taken admittedly in March 1963 by private negotiation, but no compensation was paid. The respondent had to approach this court for an appropriate writ directing the land Acquisition authority to take proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act for the purpose of determining compensation. As the Land Acquisition authorities agreed to commence and finalise the land acquisition proceedings, the land owners withdrew the writ petition. As a result, notification under sec. 4 of the Act, was published in the Government gazette on 22-3-1990. Public notices were also issued and objections were invited. After hearing the interested persons the Land Acquisition Officer declared his award on 31-8-90, whereby he awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 1.50.00 per sq. mtr. for all the lands, even though, the owners claimed compensation at the rate of Rs. 15.00 per sq. mtr. Admittedly the acquired lands were agricultural lands.

(2.) At the instance of the claimants, the District Court was moved under sec. 18 by making References which were numbered as Land Acquisition Cases No. 9/91 to 15/91 All the offences were considered and evidence were admitted did in L. A.Q. case No. 9/91. The only evidence that was led before the District Court consisted of oral evidence Exh. 24 of the claimant Narsinbhai Talshibhai, Registrar's Index Exh. 21 evidencing the sale transaction in respect of agricultural piece of land at village Utnrala, comparative statement Exh. 29 regarding agricultural lands produced by the acquisition authorities and an award made by another Reference Court, Exh. 37 in respect of agricultural land situated in another village Sangalpur. No oral evidence was led by the Acquisition authorities. Taking an over all view of the evidence produced by the parties, the learned Judge ultimately adopted the capitalisation method for determining compensation on the basis of the oral evidence led by the claimant Narsinbhai Talshibhai, and fixed Rs. 5-30P. as compensation per sq. mtr. The learned Judge also awarded solatium at the rate of 30% and running interest at the rate of 9% per annum for a period of one year from the date of taking over possession and thereafter at the rate of 15% per annum till the payment of the entire amount. The learned Judge also awarded 12% increase on the market value from the period from 18-1-90 to 31-8-90 i.e. from the date of notification under sec. 4 of the Act to the date of award under Sec. 23(1 A) of the Act. The learned Judge also awarded proportionate costs, but issued a direction to deduct 5% by way of Government share in case of new tenure lands. This common Judgment and the awards are being challenged in these 8 appeals. 5-3-1992

(3.) Mr.D.K.Trivedi, learned Government Pleader appearing for the appellants, has made the following submissions: