Gujarat High Court

Land Acquisition: 10% annual appreciation applicable to compensation when comparing adjacent village market values.

KOLI ISHWARBHAI DHARSHIBHAI SAGTHABHAI vs DEPUTY COLLECTOR,

Gujarat High CourtJUDGMENT: July 27, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The State of Gujarat acquired lands in Village Mera, Taluka Deodar, District Banaskantha for the public purpose of constructing Narmada Irrigation Project water canals

Source reference: p. 3

The Section 4 notification was published on 24.04.2000, followed by Section 6 on 13.10.2000

Source reference: p. 3

The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at ₹2.70/- per sq. mtr. via award dated 02.01.2002

Source reference: p. 3

Aggrieved, the claimants sought a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Reference Court (2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Palanpur) granted additional compensation of ₹22.50/- per sq. mtr. (total ₹25.20/-) on 24.09.2013

Source reference: p. 3

The appellants filed these appeals seeking further enhancement based on parity with adjacent villages

Source reference: p. 4
02

Issues

1. Whether the claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation based on the principle of parity with market values determined for adjacent villages (Dhunsal, Kotarvada, and Manpura)

Source reference: p. 7

2. Whether the claimants are entitled to a 10% annual increase in compensation due to the time gap between Section 4 notifications of different village acquisitions

Source reference: p. 7
03

Law Applied

The Court applied the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, specifically Section 18 regarding references to Civil Courts and principles of market value determination under Section 23

Source reference: p. 3-4

Principle of Parity, which dictates that if lands of adjoining villages share the same boundaries, fertility, and marketability, they should be awarded similar compensation

Source reference: p. 7

Settled legal precedent of granting a 10% annual enhancement (escalation) when there is a significant time gap between comparable notifications under Section 4

Source reference: p. 7
04

Reasoning

The Court observed that the lands in Village Mera are adjacent to and share boundaries with villages Dhunsal, Kotarvada, and Manpura

Source reference: p. 7

In those adjacent villages, previous judicial determinations (e.g., L.A.R. No. 13/2018 and F.A. No. 5246/2019) had fixed the compensation at ₹81.05/- per sq. mtr., which the State had accepted

Source reference: p. 6

Since the Section 4 notification for Village Mera (24.04.2000) was issued approximately three years after the notifications for the adjacent villages (1997), the Court determined that a 30% cumulative enhancement (10% per year) was necessary to reflect the rise in market value

Source reference: p. 7

The calculation followed: (Base Rate ₹2.70 + Additional ₹81.05 = ₹83.75) + 30% escalation (₹25.125) = ₹108.875, rounded to ₹109/- per sq. mtr.

Source reference: p. 7-8
05

Holding

The High Court allowed the appeals, holding that the claimants are entitled to total compensation of ₹109/- per sq. mtr.

After deducting the amount already awarded by the Reference Court (₹25.20/-), the Court granted an additional ₹83.8/- per sq. mtr. with all statutory benefits. The State was directed to deposit the amount within 12 weeks, and the Reference Court was ordered to disburse it to the claimants after verifying identities and deducting additional court fees

Source reference: p. 8-9
Gujarat High Court

Original Court PDF

KOLI ISHWARBHAI DHARSHIBHAI SAGTHABHAIvsDEPUTY COLLECTOR,

Gujarat High Court · July 27, 2026

Click to open original judgment

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

Click to open original judgment