OFFICER ON DUTY LAQ Vs. AIYUB HAJI AHMED ISMAIL BADA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these appeals, which are filed under section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 read with section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure as well as Cross Objections which are filed under the provisions of Order-41 Rule 22 of C.P.C., arise from common judgment and award dated October 19, 1988 rendered by the learned Assistant Judge, Bharuch,in Land Acquisition Reference Cases No. 16/85 to 25/85 and, therefore, we propose to dispose of all these appeals and cross-objections by this common judgment.

(2.) The Mines and Industries Department, State of Gujarat proposed to the State Government to acquire lands of village Kosamdi for the purpose of extension of Housing Colony of Industrial Estate. The State Government was satisfied that lands belonging to the claimants in these cases and others were likely to be needed for the said purpose. Therefore, notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ("the Act" for short) was issued, which was published in the Government Gazette on October 7, 1980. The land owners were served with notices, who had filed objections against the proposed acquisition. After considering the objections, Officer on Special Duty, Land Acquisition, Ahmedabad had forwarded his report to the State Government as contemplated by section 5A(2) of the Act. On receipt of the report, State Government was satisfied that the lands of village Kosamdi as mentioned in Section 4 notification were needed for public purpose of extension of Housing Colony of Industrial Estate. Therefore, declaration under section 6 of the Act was made, which was published in Government Gazette on May 6, 1982. The interested persons were thereafter served with notices under section 9 of the Act for determination of compensation. Before the Officer on Special Duty, Land Acquisition, Ahmedabad the claimants claimed compensation at the rate of Rs. 50,000.00 per Acre i.e. Rs. 1250/per Are. The Land Acquisition Officer considered the materials placed before him and offered compensation to the claimants at the rate of Rs. 200.00 per Are for non-irrigated lands and Rs. 100.00 per Are for waste lands by award dated April 26, 1984. The claimants were of the opinion that offer of compensation made by the Special Officer on Duty, Land Acquisition, Ahmedabad was inadequate. Therefore, they did not accept the award and by making applications, required the said Officer to refer the matter to the Court for the purpose of determination of compensation. Accordingly, references were made to the District Court, Bharuch, which were numbered as Land Acquisition Reference Cases No. 16/85 to 25/85. In the reference applications, it was pleaded by the claimants that having regard to better quality of the lands acquired as well as potentiality of the lands for residential and industrial use, the claimants should be paid compensation at the rate of Rs. 1250.00 per Are. It was also claimed that the Officer on Special Duty, Land Acquisition had not considered the sale instances of nearby lands of the same village and, therefore, the claimants were entitled to higher compensation. The State Government had contested the reference applications by filing written statement at Exh.14. It was, inter-alia, pleaded that the claimants had not submitted claim before the Officer on Special Duty, Land Acquisition pursuance to notices under section 9 of the Act and,therefore, references were barred by the provisions of the Act. It was further stated that the references were also barred by the provisions of Section 25 of the Act. What was claimed was that the offer made by the Officer on Special Duty, Land Acquisition was just and proper and, therefore, reference applications should be dismissed. The acquiring body i.e. Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation had also filed reply, inter-alia, stating that the compensation granted by the Officer on Special Duty, Land Acquisition was not only reasonable, but also proper and, therefore, the reference applications should be dismissed. What was highlighted in the written statement of the acquiring body was that the acquired lands were situated near Khadi-kotar lands and as there was no development either of industries or or buildings, the claimants were not entitled to higher compensation as claimed in reference applications.

(3.) In view of pleadings of parties, necessary issues for determination were raised by the Reference Court. In order to substantiate the claim advanced in the reference applications, the claimants examined; (1) Ismailbhai Sulemanbhai Mayat at Exh.123, (2) Kasambhai Ibrahimbhai Badat at Exh.139, (3) Chimanbhai Jerambhai at Exh.160, and (4) Jamolbhai Hirabhai at Exh.163. The Special Officer on Duty, Land Acquisition examined witness Natvarsinh Naharsinh Chauhan at Exh.171 in support of his case that the claimants were not entitled to higher compensation. The claimants also produced certified copies of entries from the register maintained under the provisions of Registration Act, 1908 at Exh.124 to Exh.136 through witness Ismailbhai Sulemanbhai Mayat. Witness Jamolbhai Hirabhai produced sale deed at Exh.144 regarding sale of Survey No.205/1 situated at village Bhadkodara in favour of M/s. Dattani Development Corporation for a sum of Rs. 83,700.00. Over and above the sale deeds, the claimants also produced two previous awards rendered by the Reference Court at Exhs. 31 & 32. Though the Reference Court took into consideration the evidence adduced by the parties, no reasons were indicated as to how value of acquired agricultural lands situated at village Kosamdi was assessed. It was found by the Reference Court that value of the lands situated at village Gadkhol was higher than the value of lands situated at village Kosamdi because village Gadkhol was nearer to Ankleshwar and agricultural lands situated at village Kosamdi had no value in the year 1981. However, without indicating clear reasons, Reference Court deduced that the value of the agricultural lands situated at village Kosamdi should be assessed at Rs. 720.00 per Are. This finding was probably arrived at because the Reference Court took into consideration document at Exh.129, dated March 24, 1981 which was relating to sale of 53 plots to one builder. The Reference Court was of the opinion that the agricultural lands which were acquired had building potentiality and, therefore, 30% rise in price should be considered as reasonable for the purpose of determining market value of the lands acquired. Accordingly, the Reference Court held that market value of the lands acquired would be Rs. 936/per Are. However, the Reference Court needed that this was a case of acquisition of lands on large scale and, therefore, 20% should be deducted from the market value of the lands acquired. In ultimate analysis, the Reference Court held that market value of the lands acquired as on the date of publication of notification under section 4 of the Act was Rs. 750.00 per Are, by common judgment and award dated October 19, 1988, which has given rise to the present appeals and cross-objections.