SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER Vs. PATEL SHANTILAL ODHAVJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These First Appeals emanate from judgment and award dtd. 21/2/2015 passed by learned Senior Civil Judge, Kadi, District-Mehsana, in Land Acquisition Reference Cases Nos.1458 to 1465, 1467, 1469, 1470 & 1472 of 2013 with Land Acquisition Reference No.1626 of 2013. Land Reference Cases arise out of the acquisition of land situated at Village-Agol, Taluka-Kadi, District-Mehsana, by the Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Limited for the purpose of construction of canal of Narmada Yojana. The process of acquisition of land was initiated by issuance of Notification under Sec. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity and convenience referred to as "the Act") on 31/1/2012 and publication of Notification under Sec. 6 of the Act on 31/3/2012. Thereafter, the award under Sec. 11 of the Act was passed on 28/2/2013, whereby Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at Rs.15.88 per sq.mtr. Being aggrieved, the claimants preferred afore-noted reference cases under Sec. 18 of the Act seeking enhanced compensation of Rs.1000.00 per sq.mtr. The Reference Court by impugned judgment and award awarded additional compensation of Rs.856.00 per sq.mtr. over and above the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer and also ordered that they are entitled to get compensation at the rate of 12% on additional amount of compensation so awarded as per provisions of Sec. 23 (1- A) of the Act , and solatium at the rate of 30% and running interest at the rate of 9%p.a. from the date of taking over the possession or from the date of issuance of notification under Sec. 4 of the Act, whichever is earlier and, thereafter, at the rate of 15% p.a. on aggregated amount i.e. additional awarded solatium was ordered. Accordingly, present First Appeals under Sec. 54 of the Act read with Sec. 96 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 have been filed.

(2.) Learned AGP appearing for the acquiring body, at the outset, has submitted that the award of compensation by the Reference Court is primarily based on consideration of sale instances below Exh.13 to 22. It is submitted that the sale instances or the Sale Deeds could not have been relied upon by the Reference Court while determining the compensation since the Sale Deeds pertain to small parcels of land, though of the same village, but were executed on 19/9/2011 i.e. prior to approximately four months from the date of issuance of Notification under Sec. 4 of the Act i.e. on 31/1/2012. It is also submitted that the Sale Deed is about the small parcel of land and, hence, the said sale instances could not have been relied while determining the amount of compensation. It is further submitted that the Reference Court has fallen in error in determining the average price of Rs.945.00 and, thereafter, incorrectly deducted 10% from such amount. It is submitted that the land acquired in the present cases are consisting of very large area and, hence, no reliance could have been placed on sale instances. He further submitted that, in fact, the Land Acquisition Officer had placed reliance on the judgment and award dtd. 12/3/2012 (Exh.30), rendered for the land acquired from the very same village, wherein the amount of compensation was awarded at the rate of Rs.63.00 per sq.mtr. Thus, it is submitted that the amount awarded for the land acquisition, in the present case is exorbitant and the same should have been awarded in line of the observations made in the judgment dtd. 12/3/2012. Thus, it is submitted that First Appeals may be allowed and the impugned award be set aside.

(3.) In response to the aforesaid submission, learned advocate, Mr.Prajapati has submitted that the impugned judgment and award do not require any interference and the same is properly passed. He has submitted that the Reference Court has precisely placed reliance on the sale instances Exh.13 to 22 and, after considering the sale instances, which are proved, an average price of Rs.945.00 was determined by the Reference Court and, accordingly, amount of compensation has been precisely awarded. Learned advocate, Mr.Prajapati, while placing reliance on the evidence at Exh.24, has submitted that in fact the witness of such sale deed was examined and it is proved that entire transaction has been entered of the concerned land of Village-Agol itself, vide Sale Deed dtd. 19/9/2011 and the land of very same village has been purchased by the registered Sale Deed.