Gujarat High Court
Civil Procedure and EvidenceProperty and Real Estate Law

Executing court must readjudicate the compensation claim after hearing both parties.

UNION OF INDIA THRU DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICER vs VADODARA PANJRAPOL ORGANISATION THRU PRESIDENT DIPAKBHAI J SHAH

Gujarat High CourtJUDGMENT: October 07, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Executing court must readjudicate the compensation claim after hearing both parties.. UNION OF INDIA THRU DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICER vs VADODARA PANJRAPOL ORGANISATION THRU PRESIDENT DIPAKBHAI J SHAH. Gujarat High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The Union of India challenged the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vadodara’s order dated 27 December 2018, passed below Exhibit-10 in Land Acquisition Reference No. 2 of 2015.

Source reference: para. 7

Notice had been issued in light of a coordinate Bench’s order remanding a matter said to involve an identical issue arising from the same acquisition proceedings.

Source reference: para. 4

The respondent organisation stated that it had no objection to remand for recalculation of the amount payable to it.

Source reference: para. 5

The parties agreed to that course.

Source reference: para. 6
02

Issues

1. Whether the order below Exhibit-10 should be set aside and the matter remanded to the executing Court for fresh adjudication of the respondent’s claim, including recalculation of the amount payable.

Source reference: paras. 5–7

2. Whether the executing Court should hear the parties and consider fresh calculations before deciding the claim.

Source reference: paras. 7–8
03

Law Applied

The judgment identifies no statutory provision or substantive legal test.

Source reference: no citation

It relies on a coordinate Bench’s order in Civil Revision Application No. 42 of 2013 concerning a similar issue and on the parties’ agreement to remand.

Source reference: paras. 4–6

The operative approach was to return the application for fresh adjudication, afford the parties a reasonable opportunity to be heard, and permit them to submit fresh calculations.

Source reference: paras. 7–8
04

Reasoning

The Court considered the prior remand in the similar matter and the respondent’s express lack of objection to remand for recalculation.

Source reference: paras. 4–6

Given the parties’ consensus, it accepted remand rather than determine the amount payable in the revision.

Source reference: paras. 4–6

It directed the executing Court to rehear the application, consider any fresh calculations filed by the parties, and decide the respondent’s claim afresh.

Source reference: paras. 7–8
05

Holding

The revision application was partly allowed.

The order dated 27 December 2018 below Exhibit-10 was quashed and set aside, and the matter was remanded to the executing Court for fresh adjudication after giving the parties a reasonable opportunity to be heard and permitting fresh calculations.

Source reference: paras. 7–9

The executing Court was requested to decide the claim as early as possible, preferably within two months of receiving the order.

Source reference: para. 8

The pending civil application was disposed of, and the interim relief was vacated.

Source reference: para. 9
Gujarat High Court

Original Court PDF

UNION OF INDIA THRU DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICERvsVADODARA PANJRAPOL ORGANISATION THRU PRESIDENT DIPAKBHAI J SHAH

Gujarat High Court · October 07, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment