Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC), filed first appeals under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 read with Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging the judgment and award dated 27.02.2009 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (5th Fast Track Judge), Mehsana (Reference Court) in L.A.R. Nos. 1853 to 1855 of 2003. The lands situated at village Meda Adaraj, Tal. Kadi, Dist. Mehsana were acquired for the purpose of Drilling No. JRFN by ONGC. Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 21.01.1999 and under Section 6 on 05.02.2001. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) passed an award dated 17.06.2003 awarding compensation at the rate of Rs.21 per sq. mtr. Dissatisfied, the claimants filed reference proceedings claiming compensation at Rs.125 per sq. mtr. The Reference Court, after considering oral and documentary evidence, partly allowed the references and awarded Rs.104 per sq. mtr. over and above the SLAO's award, effectively fixing the market value at Rs.125 per sq. mtr. ONGC appealed, contending that the Reference Court did not properly consider the facts and that a Division Bench of the High Court in First Appeal No. 3531 of 2011 had reduced compensation for similar lands. The High Court examined the submissions and the record. It noted that the Division Bench judgment relied upon by ONGC was not applicable as it pertained to different lands and different acquisition proceedings. The court found that the Reference Court had correctly appreciated the evidence, including sale instances and the potential use of the land for industrial/drilling purposes. There was no perversity or error in the award. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed, and the Reference Court's award was upheld. No order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Compensation - Market Value Determination - Section 23 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - The Reference Court enhanced compensation from Rs.21 to Rs.125 per sq. mtr. (Rs.104 additional) based on sale instances and potential use of land for drilling purposes - The High Court held that the Reference Court had correctly appreciated the evidence and there was no perversity in the award - Appeal dismissed (Paras 1-9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Reference Court's determination of additional compensation at Rs.104 per sq. mtr. over and above the SLAO's award of Rs.21 per sq. mtr. was justified based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed all three first appeals, upholding the Reference Court's award dated 27.02.2009. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Land Acquisition
- Compensation
- Market Value
- Comparable Sales
- Potential Use
- Section 23 Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- Section 54 Land Acquisition Act
- Section 96 CPC
Case Details
R/First Appeal No. 599 of 2010 with R/First Appeal No. 600 of 2010 with R/First Appeal No. 601 of 2010
Honourable Mr. Justice Devan M. Desai
Ms. K.J. Brahmbhatt for appellant, Ms. Shivani V. Trivedi for respondent No.1, Mr. Chirag Upadhyay, AGP for respondent No.2
General Manager, O.N.G.C.
Patel Kaushik Babubhai & Anr.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
First appeals under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 read with Section 96 of CPC challenging the Reference Court's award enhancing compensation for land acquisition.
Remedy Sought
Appellant (ONGC) sought setting aside of the Reference Court's award and reduction of compensation.
Filing Reason
Dissatisfaction with the Reference Court's enhancement of compensation from Rs.21 per sq. mtr. to Rs.125 per sq. mtr. (additional Rs.104 per sq. mtr.).
Previous Decisions
SLAO awarded Rs.21 per sq. mtr. on 17.06.2003; Reference Court partly allowed references and awarded additional Rs.104 per sq. mtr. on 27.02.2009.
Issues
Whether the Reference Court's determination of market value at Rs.125 per sq. mtr. was justified based on evidence.
Whether the Division Bench judgment in First Appeal No. 3531 of 2011 applies to the present case.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that the Reference Court did not consider facts properly and that a Division Bench had reduced compensation for similar lands.
Respondents supported the Reference Court's award, contending it was based on proper appreciation of evidence.
Ratio Decidendi
The Reference Court's determination of market value based on sale instances and potential use of land for industrial/drilling purposes was correct and not perverse. The Division Bench judgment relied upon by the appellant was not applicable as it pertained to different lands and acquisitions.
Judgment Excerpts
Present appeals are filed by the appellant - O.N.G.C. under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act read with Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 challenging the judgment and award dated 27.02.2009 passed in L.A.R. Nos. 1853 to 1855 of 2003 by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (5th Fast Track Judge), Mehsana.
The Reference Court has partly allowed the said Reference and awarded compensation of Rs.104/- per sq. mtr. over and above the amount of compensation of Rs.21/- already awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer.
Procedural History
SLAO award dated 17.06.2003 awarding Rs.21 per sq. mtr. -> Claimants filed references -> Reference Court partly allowed on 27.02.2009 awarding additional Rs.104 per sq. mtr. -> ONGC filed first appeals in 2010 -> High Court dismissed appeals on 29.01.2026.
Acts & Sections
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 4, Section 6, Section 23, Section 54
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Section 96
