SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER Vs. MANHARBHAI SOMABHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment will dispose of First Appeal Nos. 299/94 to 307/94 which relate to acquisition of land for public purpose, namely erection of flats by the Gujarat Housing Board, near Broach town Notification under Section 4 for acquiring about 29 hectares of land was issued on 1-1-1981, which was followed by notification under Section 6 on 7-12- 1983.

(2.) The Land Acquisition Collector made his award on 22nd September 1989. He awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 15/- per square metre for lands adjoining pucca road; Rs. 12/- per square metre for lands adjoining village narrow road and water channel; Rs. 10/- per square metre for the lands having no entrance and Re. 1/- per square metre for wastelands.

(3.) Thereafter, reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act was made, wherein the claimants led oral and documentary evidence in support of their claim for enhancement of compensation. The appellants herein as well as the Gujarat Housing Board did not take the trouble of leading any documentary evidence. Curiously enough, even the instances which were relied upon by the Land Acquisition Collector in determining the compensation were not tendered Vide judgment dated 26th February 1993, the Extra Assistant Judge, Broach, referred to the following placed on record by the claimants: documentary evidence, which had been <FRM>JUDGEMENT_800_GLH1_1995Html1.htm</FRM> The said documentary evidence was however, rejected by the Extra Assistant Judge by observing that the instances shown at Serial Nos. 1 to 3 and 5 to 8 were only copies of the index. In respect of sale instances shown at Serial Nos. 4, 10 and 11, the seller and purchaser had not been examined. Furthermore, the sales had taken place long after the publication of the notification under Section 4 of the Act. With regard to the instance at Serial No. 9, the Court observed that the sale took place after about three and a half years of Section 4 notification and therefore, could not be relied upon. He further took into consideration the evidence of Shri R. B. Patel, who was the purchaser of the plot of the registered sale-deed Ex. 31 and noticed that it had been deposed that the said plot was a developed one and was touching the road and had all the facilities like road, water, etc.