Gujarat High Court
Lakhiben Punjabhai vs State Of Gujarat on 28 February, 2022
Author: A.G.Uraizee
Bench: A.G.Uraizee
C/FA/993/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/02/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 993 of 2021
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3250 of 2019
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3255 of 2019
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3254 of 2019
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3256 of 2019
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3253 of 2019
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3252 of 2019
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3259 of 2019
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3257 of 2019
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3258 of 2019
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3251 of 2019
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3260 of 2019
==========================================================
LAKHIBEN PUNJABHAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR TUSHAR L SHETH(3920) for the Appellant(s) No.
1,2,2.1,2.2,2.3,2.4,3,4,5,6
MR SOAHAM JOSHI AGP for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.G.URAIZEE
Date : 28/02/2022
COMMON ORAL ORDER
Page 1 of 10
Downloaded on : Sun Apr 24 14:35:00 IST 2022
C/FA/993/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/02/2022
1. Present bunch of first appeals under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ("L.A. Act" for short) emanate from the impugned selfsame judgment and award of the Reference Court. The first appeals are, therefore, disposed of by this common order.
2. Heard Mr. Tushar Sheth, learned advocate for the appellants and Mr. Soaham Joshi, learned AGP for the respondents in all the first appeals. As common issue is involved, all the first appeals are taken up for final disposal with the consent of learned advocates for the parties.
3. For the sake of convenience, First Appeal No. 3250 of 2019, is taken as lead matter and facts are extracted therefrom.
3.1 Various parcels of land situated at Village Kothari, Taluka. Una, Dist. Junagadh were acquired for the public purpose of construction of Una-Anjar road. Page 2 of 10 Downloaded on : Sun Apr 24 14:35:00 IST 2022
C/FA/993/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/02/2022 3.2 The land acquisition procedure followed by the State can be enumerated as under:-
Section 4 notification was published 4.6.1987 Section 6 notification was published 9.10.1987 Award under Section 11 of the Act was 29.9.1988 passed 3.3 The record indicates that the Land Acquisition Officer determined the market value of the acquired land at Rs.200.00 per R.A. for irrigated land and Rs.150.00 per R.A. for non-irrigated land. As per the record, the original claimants / land owners preferred the land references under Section 18 of the L.A. Act, as they were not happy with the quantum of compensation awarded by Special Land Acquisition Officer. The references were referred for adjudication to the Court of learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Una and the references were registered as Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 59 of 2012 to 78 of 2012.
3.4 The land owners relied upon the oral as well as Page 3 of 10 Downloaded on : Sun Apr 24 14:35:00 IST 2022 C/FA/993/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/02/2022 documentary evidence as under:-
Oral Evidence:-
Ex. Particulars
14 Statement of Punja Kala, appellant of L.A.R. Case
No.1344 of 1999
18 Statement of Purshottam Tapu, appellant of L.A.R.
Case No.153 of 2005
33 Statement of Faruk Siddiki, appellant of L.A.R.
Case No.1601 of 1999
Documentary Evidence:-
Ex. Particulars
12 Common Judgment of Land Reference Case No.67
of 1999
13 Copy of statement of witness of R.K. Modhvadia, of
Land Reference Case No. 19 of 2003
16 Common Judgment of Land Reference Case
No.148 of 2005
17 Letter of Law Department accepting the judgment
31 Common Judgment of Land Reference Case
No.1338 of 1999
32 Letter of Law Department accepting decision.
The respondents relied upon following oral evidence. Page 4 of 10 Downloaded on : Sun Apr 24 14:35:00 IST 2022
C/FA/993/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/02/2022 Oral Evidence:-
Ex. Particulars
52 Statement of witness Bharatbhai Purshottambhai
Joshi on behalf of respondents
55 Statement of witness Mahendrabhai Khushalchandra
Prajapati on behalf of respondents.
3.5 The Reference Court by the impugned common judgment and award, partly allowed the land reference cases and determined the market value of the acquired lands at Rs.1,254/- per Are and after deducting Rs.200/-, as awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, held the claimants entitle to Rs.1,054/- per Are as an additional compensation for irrigated land and the Reference Court determined the market value of the acquired lands at Rs.940.50/- per Are and after deducting Rs.150/- as awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer held the claimants entitle to Rs.790.50/- per Are as an additional compensation, for non-irrigated land. However, the Reference Court did not award any compensation for the fruit bearing trees, though it was claimed by the land owners.
Page 5 of 10 Downloaded on : Sun Apr 24 14:35:00 IST 2022
C/FA/993/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/02/2022 3.6 The appellants, being aggrieved for non-granting of compensation for the fruit bearing trees have preferred present first appeal.
4. Mr. Sheth, learned advocate for the appellants submit that the Land Acquisition Officer has awarded compensation for acquired land as well as various fruit bearing trees standing on the acquired land. The appellants - claimants were not satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, they, therefore, preferred reference under Section 18 of the L.A. Act. The Reference Court, by the impugned judgment and award has awarded additional compensation for irrigated as well as non-irrigated land however, no additional compensation is awarded for the fruit bearing trees standing on the acquired land. It is his submission that the Reference Court has in a comparable previous award rendered in L.A.R. No. 1338 of 1999 and cognate references has awarded additional compensation for the fruit bearing trees standing on the acquired land as per scheduled attached to the award. It is his further submission that in comparable award also the land was Page 6 of 10 Downloaded on : Sun Apr 24 14:35:00 IST 2022 C/FA/993/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/02/2022 acquired for the purpose of construction of Una-Anjar, Road. He, further submits that though the appellants had claimed additional compensation for the fruit bearing trees which is recorded in the impugned award however, no separate additional compensation is awarded for the fruit bearing trees. It is his further submission that the Government has accepted earlier comparable award in which the additional compensation for fruit bearing trees is awarded. He, therefore, urges that the appellants may be awarded compensation for the fruit bearing trees after deducting the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer.
5. Mr. Soaham Joshi, learned AGP confirms that the Land Acquisition Officer has awarded compensation for the fruit bearing trees. He submits that the Land Reference Court has not awarded any additional compensation for the fruit bearing trees. He confirms that the earlier comparable award is accepted by the Government and no appeal is preferred against the comparable award of the Reference Court. He submits Page 7 of 10 Downloaded on : Sun Apr 24 14:35:00 IST 2022 C/FA/993/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/02/2022 that this Court may pass appropriate order.
6. I have considered the rival submissions.
7. It is an disputed fact that the Land Acquisition Officer has awarded compensation for irrigated land, non- irrigated land and fruit bearing trees. The appellants were not happy with the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer and therefore they raised reference under Section 18 of the L.A. Act which was referred to the Land Reference Court. It emerges from the impugned judgment and award that the Land Reference Court has adverted to the submission of the appellants for the grant of additional compensation for the fruit bearing trees standing on the acquired land. However, it appears that inadvertently, the additional compensation for such trees is not awarded though the additional compensation for irrigated and non-irrigated land is awarded on the basis of previous award. I am therefore, of the opinion that the present first appeals deserve to be allowed so far as additional compensation Page 8 of 10 Downloaded on : Sun Apr 24 14:35:00 IST 2022 C/FA/993/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/02/2022 for the fruit bearing trees is concerned.
8. Now, the question is at to what rate additional compensation for fruit bearing trees is required to be awarded.
9. The appellants have placed reliance on earlier award rendered in L.A.R. No. 1338 of 1999 and cognate other references. It emerges that the land was acquired for the same public purpose of construction of road for Una- Anjar. It further appears that the Section 4 as well as Section 6 Notifications are of the same date and the lands are also situated in Taluka Una of the erstwhile district of Junagadh. The appellants are therefore, also entitled to the additional compensation for the fruit bearing trees standing on the acquired land.
10. For the foregoing reasons the appeals succeed and are hereby allowed. The appellants are held entitled to the additional compensation for the fruit bearing trees, as per below mentioned table.
Page 9 of 10 Downloaded on : Sun Apr 24 14:35:00 IST 2022 C/FA/993/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/02/2022 FA LRC Claimant S.No. Number of Rate Mult. Amt. Total Deduc Payabl Trees and Amt. tion of e amt. type Amt. 993/21 69/12 Decd. PunjaNaran 147/2 Coconut 18 450 15 1,21,500 1,21,500 5,400 1,16,100 3250/19 59/12 Bhagvan Devshi 77 Coconut 16 450 15 1,08,000 1,08,000 4,800 1,03,200 3255/19 60/12 Decd. Hira Kata 73,70,64 Coconut 19 450 15 1,28,250 1,34,650 5,982 1,28,668 Saragavo 1 350 14 4,900 Raan 1 500 - 500 Limbda 1 500 - 500 Saag 1 500 - 500 3254/19 61/12 Punja Kala 63 Coconut 31 450 15 2,09,250 2,11,250 9,388 2,01,862 Limbda 4 500 - 2,000 3256/19 62/12 Decd. Vira Bava 58/2p Gunda 3 350 14 14,700 36,300 1,544 34,756 Bordi 2 350 14 9,800 Ambli 1 350 14 4,900 Tadi 1 350 14 4,900 Limbda 2 500 - 1,000 Baval 2 500 - 1,000 3253/19 63/12 Manu Kala 109 Coconut 3 450 15 20,250 20,750 922 19,828 Limbda 1 500 - 500 3252/19 64/12 Decd. Ram Nathu 117,118 Mango 1 600 15 9,000 1,24.750 6,269 1,18,481 Coconut 17 450 15 1,14,750 Limbda 2 500 - 1,000 3259/19 65/12 Decd. Bhikha 74,75, Coconut 39 450 15 2,63,250 3,44,250 21,825 3,22,425 Nathu 58/2p Mango 9 600 15 81,000 3257/19 66/12 Decd. Vasharam 71p Coconut 18 450 15 1,21,500 2,71,500 11,462 2,60,038 Devanand Banana 16 350 14 78,400 Gunda 8 350 14 39,200 mango 3 600 15 27,000 Saragvo 1 350 14 4,900 Limbdo 1 500 - 500 3258/19 67/12 Decd. Jiva 106 Coconut 11 450 15 74,250 84,550 3,750 80,800 Devanand Sopari 1 350 14 4,900 Tadi 1 350 14 4,900 Vadlo 1 500 - 500 3260/19 68/12 Decd.Rajshi 107,1 Umbro 1 500 - 500 500 15 485 Meraman 3251/19 78/12 Mandan Bhagvan 145 Coconut 11 450 15 74,250 79,150 3,580 75,570 Gunda 1 350 14 4,900
11. Office is directed to place copy of the order in each of the first appeal and Records and Proceedings be remitted to the concerned Reference Court forthwith.
(A.G.URAIZEE, J) SURESH SOLANKI Page 10 of 10 Downloaded on : Sun Apr 24 14:35:00 IST 2022