C/FA/5204/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5204 of 2008 With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5206 of 2008 With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5207 of 2008 With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5208 of 2008 With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5209 of 2008 With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5210 of 2008 With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5211 of 2008 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI ========================================================== Approved for Reporting Yes No ========================================================== SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER & ANR. Versus RAVAJIBHAI RANCCHODBHAI PATEL DECD.THROUGH THE LRS & ORS. ========================================================== Appearance: DR VENUGOPAL PATEL AGP for the Appellants No. 1,2 DECEASED LITIGANT for the Defendant(s) No. 1.1 DECEASED LITIGANT THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS/ REPRESTENTATIVES for the Defendant(s) No. 1,1.4,1.4.1,2 MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI(513) for the Defendant(s) No. 1.2,1.3,1.4.2,1.5,1.6,1.7,3,4 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI Date : 30/07/2026 COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA) C/FA/5204/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2026 1. Since the issues raised in the above captioned appeals are same, the appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. 2. The captioned appeals under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (For short “L.A. Act”) by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, the Acquiring Body, being not satisfied with the compensation determined by the learned Principle Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gandhinagar (hereinafter referred to as the “Reference Court”), in Land Acquisition Reference Cases No.303/98, 313/98, 314/98, 315/98, 322/98, 323/98, 324/98 and 310/98, decided by the judgment and award dated 11.12.2006. The operative order of the said judgment and award is reproduced as follows: Order: 1. The present land acquisition references cases are hereby allowed. 2. It is ordered that opponents do pay additional compensation to the claimants at the rate of Rs.300/- per square meter over and above the amount of compensation already awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. 3. The opponents are further ordered to pay an additional amount of compensation at the rate of 12% on additional amount of compensation awarded to the claimants according to the provision of Section 23(1-A). 4. The opponents are further directed to pay the amount of solatium at the rate of 30% on the additional amount of compensation under Section 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act. Page 2 of 9 C/FA/5204/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2026 5. The opponents are hereby ordered to pay interest on the additional compensation at the rate of 9% from the date of taking the possession or from the date of issuing notification under Section 4 of the L.A. Act whichever is earlier for the first year and thereafter, at the rate of 15% till realization of the payable aggregated amount according to the provisions of Section 28 of L.A. Act. 6. The opponents shall pay the proportionate cost and shall bear their own cost. 3. For the sake of brevity, the facts are being considered from the lead matter (First Appeal No.5204 of 2008-Land Reference Case No.310 of 1998 wherein the common evidence came to be recorded and arguments being advanced by the parties in the main matter). 4. For the sake of brevity and convenience, the appellant being referred as “acquiring body” and the respondents being referred as “land owners”. 5. The facts in brief, necessary for adjudication of the captioned appeals are as follows: The land of the respondents-original land owners situated at Village: Adalaj, Taluka: Gandhinagar, were acquired by the acquiring body for the purpose of making road connecting with Adalaj-Nabhoi-Koba link road. Notification under Section 4 of the L.A. Act was issued on 23.12.1993. Section 6 notification was issued on 24.11.1994. Possession was being taken on 30.09.1991. Award under Section 11 of the L.A. Act was declared by the C/FA/5204/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2026 acquiring body on 30.01.1996 determining the rate of compensation at the rate of Rs.8 per square meter and for some of block numbers Rs.7 per square meter for such acquired agricultural land. The land owners sought reference before the Reference Court seeking enhancement in such compensation at the rate of Rs.300 per square meter. The Reference Court, by the impugned judgment and award dated 11.12.2006, granted additional compensation at the rate of Rs.300/- per square meter and other statutory benefits. The award passed in group of land refence cases has been challenged by the State Authorities in this group of appeals. 6. Before the Reference Court, the land reference cases being consolidated with main LAR No.310 of 1998 for the purpose of recording evidence. On behalf of the claimants, the land owner Mahendrabhai Ravjibhai Patel being son and power of attorney holder of Ravjibhai was examined at Exh.31. The claimants have mainly relied upon the judgment (Exh.44) passed in LAR No.994 of 1998 and allied matters, passed by the Civil Judge, Gandhinagar wherein the lands of Village: Adalaj were acquired as exemplar award. In the said case, the additional amount of compensation at the rate of Rs.200/- was awarded by the Reference Court. While determining the market value of the land acquired, the Reference Court in its award, more particularly in para-24 of the award, observed thus: “Looking to all aspects and documentary evidence brought on record, I come to the conclusion that the judgment was delivered by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gandhinagar on 07/11/2006 in L.A.R. C/FA/5204/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2026 No.994/98 (Exh.44) of the lands of village Adalaj which are just adjoining to the land of the present case as well as the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and other High Court of the different States are most applicable to the present case and, therefore, after considering the judgment as aforesaid and surrounding development area of the disputed land, the applicants/claimants are entitled to get the amount of latest award passed in the surrounding areas land which are just adjacent to the disputed land after publication of the notification. In the present case the judgment Exh.44 is of the year 2006 which is latest one. Therefore judgment Exh.44 of the lands of same village Adalaj is the relevant and the material piece of evidence to determine the market value potential value of the present case. The notification u/s. 4 of the land acquisition Act was published on 07/11/90 in L.A.R. No.994/98 (Exh.44) while in the case on hand the notification u/s.4 was published on 23.12.1993. Looking to the time gap difference between these two notifications, it appears that there is a time gap difference of three years and hence the claimants are entitled to get the amount of Rs.327/--[s.252/- per Sq.mtr. as per judgment Exh.44 of same village Adalaj Plus Rs.75/- i.e. 10% prince rise of Rs.252/- for three years]. In view of the above discussion, the claimants are entitled compensation at the rate of Rs.327/- per Sq.mtr as discussed above. The land acquisition officer has already awarded Rs.7/-- per Sq.mtr in L.A.R. Nos.303/98, 314/98, 315/98, 322/98, 323/98 and 324/98 and Rs.8/- per Sq.mtr in L.A.R. Nos.313/98 and 310/98. Therefore, deducting Rs.7/- from Rs.327/- it would be come to Rs.320/- per Sq.mtr. Therefore, the claimants of L.A.R. Nos.303/98, 314/98, 315/98, 322/98, 323/98 and 324/98 are entitled to additional compensation of Rs.320/- per Sq.mtr and claimants of L.A.R. Nos.313/98 and 310/98 are entitled Rs.319/-[Rs.327/- minus Rs.8/-] per Sq.mtr. It is pertinent to note that though the claimants are entitled additional compensation at the rate of Rs.319/- and Rs.320/- per Sq. mtr but unfortunately the claimants have demanded only Rs.300/- per Sq.mtr. The Court cannot grant more compensation then claim. Therefore claimants are entitled Rs.300/- per Sq.mtr as C/FA/5204/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2026 discussed above.” 7. In such circumstances, the appellant-acquiring body, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned award, is before this Court with the captioned appeals. 8. Dr. Venugopal Patel, learned AGP while assailing the award, submitted that, the Reference Court erred in placing reliance upon the judgment of group of appeals, without undertaking an independent assessment of comparability. Mere identity of the village cannot justify adoption of the same rate. In the facts of present case, the land acquired for the purpose of making link road so as to connect it with the National and State Highway Road. The acquired land was 6 kilometers away from the main road, whereas, the land acquired for the relied upon judgment was near to the highway. Thus, therefore, the Land Reference Court has not undertaken an independent determination of the market value as required under the law, but has mechanically adopted the rate from the relied judgment without evaluating the necessary factors governing the valuation including the requirement to consider location, nature and potentiality of the land. 9. In such circumstances, it is submitted that, the claimants-land owners had also relied on the judgment of Land Reference Cases No.924 of 1998 and allied matters, wherein the Reference Court had determined Rs.1750/- per square meter and same came to be modified by this Court and rate was fixed Rs.231/- per square meter and the land acquired of the Village: Sargasan was having all potentiality and the T.P. Scheme was also sanctioned to the area C/FA/5204/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2026 and despite of this, the market value was determined at Rs.231/-. Thus, compared to the development of Village: Sargasan, the rate of Village: Adalaj could be accepted up to Rs.168/- per square meter and therefore, having regard to the facts of the present case, the award passed by the Reference Court does require interference and by allowing the appeals, the reasonable market value may be fixed and award may be modified accordingly. 10. Mr. Vibhuti Nanavati, learned counsel appearing for and on behalf of the land owners has submitted that the Land Reference Court has rightly determined their market value of the land as except Exh. 44, the judgment delivered with respect to land acquired in the same village i.e. Adalaj, no other evidence being available for determination of the market value and therefore, the market value based upon the exemplar which is the best exemplar available on record and having considered the time gap of 3 years, the Land Reference Court has not committed any error while adding 30% in the price fixed by the relied judgment. 11. We have heard at length learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and perused the case records as well as the impugned Award passed by the learned Reference Court. 12. In the case at hand, there is no dispute in respect of acquisition of lands situated at village: Adalaj – Gandhinagar, for the purpose of making link road as referred above. In support of their claim for enhanced compensation for acquired land, the respondents land owners led oral as well as documentary evidence and heavily relied C/FA/5204/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2026 on the award of the Land Reference Court (994 of 1998 and allied matters). In the relied judgment, the lands of village: Adalaj for the purpose of making road connecting with Gandhinagar – Khodiyar Junction, were acquired by notification under Section 4 dated 07.11.1990. The land owners claimed enhanced amount by filing References. The Reference Court relying upon the Award passed for the lands of Adalaj and giving 10% rise as there was a gap of 5 years between the two notifications and finally, determined the market value per sq.mt Rs.252/-. However, considering the claim of Rs.200/-, Reference Court, did not grant Rs.250/- but enhanced compensation upto to Rs.200/- per sq.mt. only. In such circumstances, it is settled position of law that where more than one exemplar is available on record, the land owner is entitled to the benefit of the highest comparable value. Thus, the principle followed by the Reference Court while adopting highest price available for determination of the market value and in that view of the matter, in the opinion of this Court, the Reference Court has rightly determined the market value upon highest exemplar Exh. 44. In the present case and the judgment relied (Exh. 44), the nature of lands are same and situated in the same village and thus, the other factors which are relevant for determination of value, are similar and identical with the exemplar relied by Reference Court (Exh. 44). 13. In light of the above discussions, Land Reference Court has not committed any error in determination of the market value of the lands in question and we do no find any grounds to interfere with C/FA/5204/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2026 the well reasoned order passed by the Land Reference Court. 14. Accordingly, these appeals fail and are hereby dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Records and proceedings be transmitted to the Reference court forthwith. The amount deposited by the acquiring body is permitted to be withdrawn by the land owners with interest accrued thereon, if not already withdrawn. 15. Registry is directed to keep copy of this judgment and order in each matter. (ILESH J. VORA,J) (R. T. VACHHANI, J) P.S. JOSHI Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judges. Digitally signed by: PALLAV SUBHASHCHANDRA JOSHI(HC00177), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 30/07/2026 12:58:18