STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. ABRAHAMBHAI BHUVABHAI MALEK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This group of six appeals arise from common judgment and award of the learned 2nd Extra Assistant Judge, Kheda at Nadiad, passed in Land Acquisition Reference Cases No. 56/90 and other consolidated cases. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted a statement showing the amount of additional compensation awarded by the Civil Court in these appeals. Out of the six appeals, in three appeals the amount of additional compensation awarded by the Civil Court is less than Rs. 15,000/-, and as such these three appeals deserve to be dismissed in view of the decision of this Court in Civil Application No. 7867/97 and cognate matters decided on 10th September, 1997. In the other three appeals, the amount of compensation awarded is more than Rs. 15,000/- and as such they are to be considered on merits.

(2.) The date of notification under Sec. 4 is 12th February, 1987 and that of Sec. 6 notification is 14th July, 1987. The land in dispute was acquired for Mahi canal project. These lands are Situated in village Khuntaj of Nadiad Taluka, District Kheda. The Special Land Acquisition Officer has awarded compensation to the claimants at the rate of Rs. 1.50 ps. per sq. mt. Feeling aggrieved by that award the claimants prayed for making reference of the matter to the Civil Court under Sec. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Accordingly reference was made. The claimants have prayed for awarding compensation to them, for the land acquired, at the rate of Rs. 10 per sq. mt. Under the impugned award the learned reference Court awarded compensation to the claimants at the rate of Rs. 8.81 per sq. mt. which resulted in additional compensation to the claimants at the rate of Rs. 7.31 ps. per sq. mt. Hence these appeals.

(3.) The claimants were also ordered to be given severance charges at 12% on the market value. The learned reference Court has determined the compensation to be paid to the claimants on crop basis. The income has been taken to Rs. 4233/- per biga, and multiplier of 5 has been taken. To arrive at that conclusion the learned reference Court has considered the evidence produced by the claimants.