VAGHRI MOHAN DEVSI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are filed by the original claimants. The original claimants have challenged the judgment and awards of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Junagadh in respective Land Reference Case Nos.58, 51, 52 and 53 of 2009. The grievance is limited. Their contention is that the Reference Court, in the process of passing awards, has committed arithmetical and computational errors, which has drastically reduced the compensation payable to the claimants. They therefore seek rectification of such errors and the interference of this Court to this limited extent.

(2.) Brief facts are as under:­ [2.1] Different parcels of lands of the claimants came to be acquired by the Government, for which notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was published on 17.07.1996 and Section 6 Notification was published on 08.05.1997. The Land Acquisition Officer passed his award on 22.02.1999, in which he granted compensation at the rate of Rs.250/­ per Are for non­ irrigated lands and at the rate of Rs.375/­ per Are for irrigated lands. The claimants sought references against the awards. Before the Reference Court, the claimants relied on yield method of assessment and produced evidence in this respect. From the evidence on record, the Reference Court came to the conclusion that the annual yield of the crops per 'vigha' was Rs.1,26,563/­. The Reference Court set apart 50% thereof for the cost of production such as fertilizer, pesticides, labour charges, etc. and held that the annual income from such land was Rs.63,281/­ per 'vigha'. The Reference Court adopted multiplier of 10 for the purpose of assessing market value of the land. Though not recorded in the judgment, this would mean that according to the Reference Court, the value of the land was assessed at Rs.6,32,815/­ per 'vigha'. Since the Land Acquisition Officer had awarded compensation on the basis of per Are computation, the Reference Court then converted such market value of the land on the basis of Ares. According to the learned Judge, this would come to Rs.3,955/­ per Are. He therefore awarded such sum for irrigated lands and after deducting Rs.375/­ already awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, he awarded additional compensation of Rs.3,580/­ per Are. For non­irrigated lands, he reduced the compensation by 25% and granted additional compensation of Rs.2,716/­ per Are.

(3.) Mr. Amin, learned advocate appearing for the appellants in all these appeals has relied upon the decision dated 09.01.2018 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in First Appeal Nos.3560 of 2017 and allied matters, decision dated 30.07.2018 of the coordinate Bench of this Court in First Appeal No.296 of 2018 and allied matters, decision dated 18.07.2019 passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in First Appeal No.1761 of 2019 and allied matters, decision dated 14.08.2018 passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in First Appeal No.3084 of 2017 and allied appeals and decision dated 11.04.2019 passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in First Appeal No.1572 of 2019 and the decision dated 10.10.2019 passed by this Court in First Appeal Nos.4842 of 2019 and other allied appeals would submit that the above decisions arising out of the same village, same scheme and acquired for the same purpose and urged this Court that mere rectification may not be permissible, the interference shall be needed for remanding the matters back.