(1.) HEARD learned AGP Mr. Manisha Narsinghani for appellants and Mr. Krunal D. Pandya, learned Advocate for respondents claimants in this group of appeals.
(2.) BY filing these appeals, appellants have challenged award passed by reference Court Bharuch in LAR Case No. 74 to 112 of 1997 (Main LAR No. 74/97) Exh. 178 dated 30.4.2005 wherein reference Court has held that the claimants are entitled to get market price of their acquired lands at the rate of Rs. 36.50 ps. Per sq. mtrs. as additional compensation with other usual benefits. Lands of claimants were acquired by Special Land Acquisition Officer by his award dated 3.11.1993 and awarded Rs. 2.20 ps. Per sq mtr. Under LAQ No. 27/91 and, therefore, aforesaid references were made at the instance of claimants under sec. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. Acquired lands were of the same village and vicinity and acquired under LAQ Case No. 27/91, therefore, as per Exh.10 application made on behalf of claimants, matters were consolidated and evidence was recorded in main LAR No. 74 of 1997 which have been decided by reference Court vide aforesaid common judgment and award.
(3.) ON the other hand, learned Advocate Mr. Krunal Pandya appearing for respondent claimants has made submission while supporting impugned award that this Court has considered First Appeal No. 2686 of 2007 to First Appeal No. 2693 of 2007 by order dated 13th February, 2009 wherein award made by reference Court Bharuch in LAR No. 2822 to 2829 of 1997 Exh. 126 dated 5th March, 2005 awarding additional compensation of Rs. 36.50 per square meter in Compensation Case No. 71 of 1994 was under challenge. He further submitted that in the said matter, Reference Court has considered the previous award in respect to village Ikkhar Exh.74 and Exh.75 passed in LAR Case Nos.400 to 408 of 1992 and LAR Case No. 1179 to 1205 of 1992 and 1993 and the Notification under Section -4 in respect to Ikkhar village of previous award was dated 14.6.1990. He further submitted that this Court has dismissed said appeals filed by the State authority relying upon the previous award passed in respect of village Ikkhar as well as also considered market price of acquired land of village Danda on the basis of yield method after deducting cultivation costs. Learned AGP Ms. Manisha Narsinghani raised contention pointing out difference in respect to section 4 notification. She further submitted that in respect to village Ikkhar which has been relied upon, date of section 4 notification is 14th June, 1990 and decision of this Court is dated 13.2.2009 in First Appeal No. 2686 to 2693 of 2007 wherein section 4 notification is dated 25.7.1995.She further submitted that in this group of appeals, section 4 notification is dated 28.10.91 and section 6 notification is dated 14.5.1992 and, therefore, that much amount is to be reduced at the rate of 10 per cent for a period of four years from 1991 to 1995. As against that submission, learned Advocate Mr. Pandya for claimants submitted that in this group of appeals, reference Court has decided market price on the basis of yield method after deducting 50 per cent cultivation costs. He submitted that when reference Court has examined matter on the basis of having income by claimants from concerned land, question of deduction of 10 per cent on the basis of difference of date of section 4 notification does not arise. As against that, learned AGP Ms. Manisha Narsinghani submited that in respect to consideration of price, reference Court has considered value available in the year 1995 -96 and, therefore, when section 4 notification is taken into account, then, whatever price for sugarcane is available, in the year 1991 -92 is to be taken into account but instead of that, reference Court has considered price of sugarcane prevailing in the year 1995 -96 and thereafter deducted 50 per cent cultivation costs and, therefore, compensation of Rs. 36.50 awarded by reference Court is on higher side to that extent and same is required to be reduced by 10 per cent for four years.