Matter Remanded to Determine Just Compensation Based on Proximity of Comparable Land Acquisition Instances

The appellants challenged the judgment and award dated 12.04.2012 passed by the 4th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mehsana, in LAR No. 233/2008

The reference court had determined additional compensation for acquired lands in Saduthala village at ₹134 per sq. mtr.

The appellants contended that this specific appeal was inadvertently left out of a group of similar cases previously decided by the High Court on 24.01.2025, wherein the court had remanded the matters for fresh determination of market value based on new evidence

1. Whether the present appeal warrants a remand to the reference court for a fresh determination of compensation based on additional evidence and proximity to other acquired lands

The court primarily applied Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which grants an aggrieved party the right to seek a judicial reference for the determination of the correct amount of compensation

It also relied on Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act read with Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure regarding appellate jurisdiction

The court emphasized the principles of "best exemplar," which require a consideration of the proximity of the Section 4 notification timeline and the geographical distance between the acquired lands and the comparison instances

The court noted that the subject lands in Saduthala were acquired for the same project ("SIPU Yojna") as lands in Visnagar

It observed that the Section 4 notification for Visnagar (18.07.2002) and Saduthala (02.08.2002) were issued only 14 days apart, satisfying the proximity of time test

Furthermore, technical sketches indicated that the lands formed part of the same channel, satisfying the proximity of distance test

The court reasoned that to ensure "just and fair compensation," the claimants must be allowed to produce additional documents—specifically the Visnagar judgments—as these were potentially superior exemplars to those originally relied upon by the reference court at Exh-10, 11, and 32

The matter is remanded to the Reference Court, Mehsana, to determine the correct compensation amount after allowing the appellants to produce additional evidence

The court clarified that the claimants shall not be entitled to interest for the delayed period between the original reference court order and the filing of the appeal

All rights and contentions regarding the final enhancement amount remain open