C/FA/5337/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/07/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5337 of 2019 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE) NO. 1 of 2020 In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5337 of 2019 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR AMENDMENT) NO. 1 of 2026 In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5337 of 2019 With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5333 of 2019 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR AMENDMENT) NO. 1 of 2026 In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5333 of 2019 With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5336 of 2019 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR AMENDMENT) NO. 1 of 2026 In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5336 of 2019 With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5773 of 2019 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR AMENDMENT) NO. 1 of 2026 In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5773 of 2019 With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5774 of 2019 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR AMENDMENT) NO. 1 of 2026 In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5774 of 2019 With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5775 of 2019 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR AMENDMENT) NO. 1 of 2026 In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 5775 of 2019 ========================================================== GANCHI KARAMSIBHAI BHALABHAI (DECEASED THRU LEGAL HEIRS) & ORS. Versus SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER & ORS. ========================================================== Appearance: DECEASED LITIGANT THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS/ REPRESTENTATIVES for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR VIRAL J DAVE(5751) for the Appellant(s) No. 1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5 C/FA/5337/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/07/2026 DELETED for the Defendant(s) No. 3 MS DIXA PANDYA, AGP for the Respondent No. 1 MR RUTVIJ S OZA(5594) for the Respondent No. 2 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI Date : 31/07/2026 JUDGMENT IN CAs FOR AMENDMENT Considering the averments made in the applications, the same are allowed. Necessary amendments to be carried out in the original proceedings. IN FIRST APPEALS 1. Being aggrieved by the common judgment and award dated 28.10.2013 passed by the learned 2nd Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Banaskantha @ Palanpur in LAR Nos.6 of 2000 to 12 of 2000, First Appeal Nos.5337, 5333, 5336, 5773 and 5774 all of 2019 are filed by the original claimants before this Court. Whereas First Appeal No.5775 of 2019 is filed challenging common judgment and award dated 31.12.2014 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Banaskantha @ Palanpur in LAR No.5 of 2000. 2. Brief facts of the case in First Appeal Nos.5337, 5333, 5336, 5773 and 5774 all of 2019 are as under:- 2.1 The lands of the claimants situated at village Savpura, C/FA/5337/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/07/2026 Tal: Tharad, Dist: Banaskantha came to be acquired by the State for the purpose of Narmada Project by issuing notifications under sections 4 and 6 of the Act on 29.4.1997 and 26.9.1997 respectively. The Special Land Acquisition Officer vide his award dated 19.7.1999 awarded Rs.2.06 paisa per sq mtr as compensation for the acquired lands. The claimants preferred reference under section 18 of the Act before the Court of learned Reference Court, Banaskantha @ Palanpur, who by impugned common judgment and award, partly allowed the reference of the original claimants and granted additional amount of compensation of Rs. 15.54 paisa per sq.mtr over and above the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. Feeling aggrieved by the award, the claimants have preferred the present appeals. 3. Brief facts of the case in First Appeal No.5775of 2019 are as under:- 3.1 The lands of the claimants situated at village Savpura, Tal: Tharad, Dist: Banaskantha came to be acquired by the State for the purpose of Narmada Project by issuing notifications under sections 4 and 6 of the Act on 10.3.1997 and 10.7.1997 respectively. The Special Land Acquisition Officer vide his award dated 26.7.1999 awarded Rs.3.10 paisa per sq mtr for irrigated land and Rs.2.06 paisa per sq mtr for non-irrigated land as compensation for the acquired lands. The claimants preferred reference under section 18 of the Act before the Court of learned Reference Court, Banaskantha @ Palanpur, who by impugned common judgment and award, partly allowed the reference of the original claimants and C/FA/5337/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/07/2026 granted additional amount of compensation of Rs. 15.54 paisa per sq.mtr over and above the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. Feeling aggrieved by the award, the claimants have preferred the present appeal. 4. Heard learned advocate Mr. Viral Dave for the original claimants, learned AGP Ms. Dixa Pandya for the respondent State and learned advocate Mr. Rutvij Oza for the respondent No.2. 5. Learned advocate Mr. Viral Dave appearing for the claimants relying upon the judgment of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in First Appeal Nos.141 of 2026 and allied matters, would submit that in the case on hand, land of village Savpura is acquired for the purpose of Narmada canal project, whereas, in the judgment relied upon, land of village Bhapi was acquired for the same purpose of Narmada canal project. He would further submit that section 4 Notification of the Act was issued on even date or with a litter variance of 2-3 months. He would further submit that the marketability, potentiality and fertility of lands of village Savpura and Bhapi is one and the same and both are adjacent to each other and even touched by the geographical boundaries. Thus, he would submit that since the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the aforestated First Appeals, granted total compensation of Rs.76/- per sq mtr, same compensation may be granted in the present case also. 5.1 Upon such submissions, learned advocate Mr. Dave requests to allow present First Appeals. Page 4 of 10 C/FA/5337/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/07/2026 6. On the other hand, learned advocate Mr. Rutvij Oza and learned AGP, in the facts and circumstances of the case, request the Court to pass necessary orders. 7. Having heard learned advocates for all the parties, at the outset, what could be noticeable that notification u/s 4 of the Act issued for the lands of village Bhapi and Savpura were of nearby dates i.e. variance of only 1-2 months. Even, the award in all the matters was passed in the year 1999; the purpose of acquisition of the lands was also one and the same. 8. The controversy has been put to rest by the Coordinate Bench of this Court by passing judgment in the aforestated First Appeals, which arose from the land acquisition of village Bhapi, which is adjacent to village Savpura (subject matter of present First Appeals). Para 5 and 6 are very relevant, which read as under:- “5. Having considered the submission made by learned advocates for the respective parties, it emerges from the record that the boundary of village Bhapi which is under acquisition and village Vami, on which reliance was placed, is common. It is also not disputed by learned AGP Mr.Parth Patel that the decision rendered by the Division Dench of this Court in First Appeal No.701/2017 was accepted and the compensation has been paid to the respective claimants. It is true that for the same village Vami, another decision was rendered by this Court, prior to the decision rendered in First Appeal No.701/2017 wherein the market value of the land was fixed at the rate of Rs.75/- per sq.mtr. in which the notification is of the year 1999 however, in the opinion of this Court, the claimants C/FA/5337/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/07/2026 are entitled for the best price as their lands were acquired under the compulsory acquisition. In that background, it would be more beneficial for the claimants if the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in First Appeal No.701/2017 is applied here, where the date of notification is 28.08.1997. As in the instant case date of notification having only four months difference i.e 29.04.1997, the claimants would be entitled for the same market value as decided by this Court in First Appeal No.701/2017. The relevant portion of the above decision is reproduced herienbelow: “6. We have heard learned AGP for the appellant-State, we have perused the record of the case made available by learned AGP. 7. Upon perusal of the impugned judgment, it is apparent that the Reference Court has enumerated oral and documentary evidence available on record. The Reference Court has taken into consideration the submissions on behalf of the claimants, who had demanded an amount of Rs.200/- per sq. mtr. Submission was also made on behalf of the claimants on the basis of yield and thereafter, reliance is placed upon Land Reference Case Nos.116 of 2003 to 131 of 2003 of the same village, i.e. Vami. Over and above, reliance was placed upon the judgment in LAR No.185 of 2002 in case of adjoining village of Mahajanpura and in both the references, the Reference Court had assessed the market value at the rate of Rs.95.40 per sq. mtr. 8. The Reference Court has also taken into consideration the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Mohammad Raofuddin Vs. The Land Acquisition Officer, (2009) 14 SCC, 367 and General Manager, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. Vs. Rameshbhai Jivanbhai patel & Anr., 2008 (4) GLR, 2833 and thereafter has concluded as under:- C/FA/5337/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/07/2026 “20. Therefore in view of the above judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court it is well settled legal position of the law that Reference Court took into consideration awards in respect of lands of adjacent villages at or about dated notification under Section 4(1) of the Act are best guide for determination of market value of land to arrive at a fair estimate of amount of compensation payable to land owner. In the present case claimants have relied upon the judgment of village Mahajanpura and village Vami. Village Mahajanpura is at a distance of 2 km from Vammi and in the judgment of village Mahajanpura market value is determined relying upon the judmgent of village Negla which is confirmed by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court. The judgment of village Vami was passed considering the earlier judgment of village Jamda. Claimants has produced copy of the Judgment of village Vami wide Exhibit 61/1, in which market value of Rs.95.40/- per sq. meters fixed on the date of publication of notification u/s.14 i.e. 29/10/1999. While in the case of village Nagla market value of Rs.95.40/- per sq. meter is fixed on the date of publication of notification u/s.4 i.e. 8/8/1999. Upon considering both the judgments market value in the year 1999 was considered Rs.95.40 per sq. meter. Ld. Advocate for the claimants has produced previous judgment of same village Vami and therefore in the present references cases market value is determined considering the earlier judgment of LAR No.116/2003 to 131/2003. Looking to the evidence of the claimant he has stated that notification u/s. was published on 30/04/1997 but looking to the reference application exh-1 and award passed by LAO notification u/s.4 was published on 28/08/1997. In section 4(1) of the Act it is provided that the last date of the dates of such publication and the giving of C/FA/5337/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/07/2026 such public notice, being hereinafter referred to as the date of the publication of the notification. Looking to the award last date of publication is 28/08/1997 and therefore market value on 28/08.1997 of the acquired land is to be determined. In the present case notification was published on 28/8/1997 while in LAR 116/2003 to 131/2003 date of notification was 29/10/1999 and hence there is time gap of 2 years 2 months 1 day. Therefore looking to the difference in both notification market value can be calculated by 10% decrease per year on Rs.95.40. So decrease at the rate of 10% of 95.40 for time gap would come to Rs.95.40-9.54=85.86- Rs.8.58=Rs.77.28/-Rs.1.28 = Rs.76.00 per sq. meter. Therefore in the present case market value on the date of publication of notification i.e. 28/8/1997 comes to Rs.76 per sq. meter. Hence the claimants are entitled to get Rs.76.00 per sq. mt. as an additional compensation for the acquired land. Hence I answer issue no.1 in affirmative.” 9. Learned AGP is unable to contest this proposition that where the market value of the land belonging to the same village i.e. Vami being fixed at Rs.95.40 per sq. mtr. and which is accepted by the State then there is no reason to differentiate the market value of similar type of /and of thesame village. In fact, the Reference Court is justified in arriving at the market value at Rs.77.28 by considering the base price of Rs.95.40 of village Vami where Section 4 notification is dated 29.10.1999. Thereafter, justifiably has allowed reduction in the market value at the rate of 10% per year considering the fact that Section 4 notification in the present acquisition was published on 28.08.1997, where there is time gap of two years and two months. 10. Learned AGP has thereafter not canvassed any other ground to substantiate C/FA/5337/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/07/2026 the challenge to the Reference Court. 11. In view of the aforesaid, the judgment and award of the Reference Court being passed on proposition of law and after appreciation of evidence on record, needs no interference. The appeals therefore deserve to be and are hereby dismissed. No order at to costs. 12. In view of the order passed in the main First Appeals, Civil Applications do not survive. Disposed of accordingly.” Considering the same, claimants would be entitled for the market value at the rate of Rs.76/-per sq.mtr. for irrigated as well as non-irrigated land as the Division Bench of this Court, in above appeal, has granted equal amount for irrigated and non- irrigated land and State has accepted the same. Accordingly, the difference amount is required to be paid to the claimants. The remaining part of the impugned judgment shall remain unaltered.” 9. In view of above, without dealing further into the merits of the case, when lands of village Bhapi and Savpura having similarly situated on all aspects, the amount of compensation granted by the Coordinate Bench of this Court is required to be granted in the present group of matters also. 10. In the result, present First Appeals are allowed. Impugned common judgment and award dated 28.10.2013 passed by the learned 2nd Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Banaskantha @ Palanpur in LAR Nos.6 of 2000 to 12 of 2000 so also common judgment and award dated 31.12.2014 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Banaskantha @ Palanpur in LAR No.5 of 2000 are hereby quashed and set aside. 11. Now, the claimants would be entitled for the market C/FA/5337/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/07/2026 value at the rate of Rs.76/-per sq.mtr being total compensation for irrigated as well as non-irrigated land inclusive of the compensation already awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer as well as the learned Reference Court, with all statutory benefits. 12. Request of learned advocate Mr. Rutvij Oza as well as learned AGP to deposit enhanced amount of compensation within a period of 08 weeks is accepted. 13. The learned Reference Court is directed to disburse the amount of compensation deposited by the State Government after deducting Court fee on additional amount of compensation, to the claimants after due verification and identification along with interest and after verifying their right to claim the compensation. 14. It is clarified that the claimants are not entitled for the interest on the delayed period. 15. Consequently, CAs do not survive and stand disposed of accordingly. 16. Registry is directed to return back the R & P, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. (J. C. DOSHI,J) SHEKHAR P. BARVE Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: SHEKHAR PRAFULBHAI BARVE(HC00200), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 31/07/2026 15:25:54