LAWS(GJH)-2008-2-274

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER Vs. LALBHAI GANESHBHAI

Decided On February 12, 2008
SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER Appellant
V/S
Lalbhai Ganeshbhai Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE aforesaid First Appeals have been preferred against the judgment and award dated 30th September, 2005 in LAQR Nos. 233 of 1999 to 238 of 1999 passed by the learned 4th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural), whereby the trial court has awarded total amount of compensation of Rs. 32.90 ps. per sq.mtr. for the land situated at village Dangarwa, Ta: Viramgam, Dist: Ahmedabad.

(2.) IT appears from the the facts of the case that the land in question was acquired by the present appellants for the public purpose, namely constructing of Narmada canal. The notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued on 3rd April, 1998. Thereafter, section 9 notification was issued on 4th September, 1998. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.1.60 ps. per sq.mtr. as well as at the rate of Rs. 2.40 per sq.mtr. . The award of the Land Acquisition Officer is dated 26th April, 1999. It also appears from the facts of the case that thereafter, the claimants have preferred reference wherein they are claiming compensation at the rate of Rs. 50/ - per sq.mft.

(3.) IT also appears from the facts of the case that while deciding the aforesaid land reference cases, the trial court has heavily relied upon exh. 31 which is a decision rendered by this Court in First Appeal Nos. 2578 of 2006 to 2586 of 2006 dated 13th October, 2006 whereby Rs. 23.70 ps. per sq.mtr. was awarded for the land situated at village Madresana, Ta: Viramgan, (now after bifurcation situated in Taluka Detroj, Dist: Ahmedabad.). It appears that for the land situated at village Madresana, section 4 notification was issued in the year 1994, whereas in the facts of the present case, section 4 notification was issued on 3rd April, 1998 and therefore, the trial court has awarded Rs. 32.90 ps. per sq.mtr. as total compensation. Against this award, the appellants have preferred the present First Appeals.