The Reference Court Stuck To Its Own Rate. The Better Exemplar Was On Record.

Published on: September 3, 2026
Last updated: 3 July 2026

Landowners were awarded Rs 21 per square metre. A judgment for a neighbouring village, acquired five days apart, had fixed Rs 100. The High Court has applied it.

The short answer

The Court held that the claimant is entitled to the higher comparable value where the best exemplar is on record. A judgment fixing Rs 100 per square metre for an adjoining village had attained finality, and the two Section 4 notifications were five days apart in the same year, so no adjustment was needed. Additional compensation was awarded, the landowners' appeals partly allowed and the acquiring body's dismissed.

What changed
  • The best exemplar wins. Where a higher comparable value exists on record, the claimant is entitled to it.
  • An unchallenged judgment is powerful evidence — the acquiring body never appealed the Rs 100 rate.
  • Five days apart, same year, so there was no need to escalate or discount for time.
  • Order 41 Rule 33 reached non-appealing claimants, who got Rs 130 per square metre without having filed their own appeal.
Court
High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad
Citation
R/First Appeal No. 1862 of 2012 and connected appeals
Case
R/First Appeal No. 1862 of 2012 and connected appeals
Decided
1 September 2026
Outcome
Landowners' appeals partly allowed; acquiring body's appeals dismissed

What the Reference Court did

The Reference Court determined the market rate at Rs 69 per square metre and, after deductions, awarded Rs 21 per square metre.

The Court found it had stuck to its own earlier judgment with a predetermination, even though the best exemplar of a higher value was available on the record.

The exemplar that decided it

A previous judgment in a land acquisition reference had treated Rs 100 per square metre as a fair market rate for land acquired at an adjoining village. That judgment had attained finality, not having been challenged by the acquiring body.

The Section 4 notification in the present case issued on 27 April 1999; the one for the neighbouring village on 22 April 1999. Being the same year, and five days apart, there was no need to reduce or increase the figure for the passage of time.

The market rate could therefore be taken at Rs 100 per square metre, and the claimants were held entitled to that as additional compensation over the Special Land Acquisition Officer's award, with statutory benefits and interest.

Relief for those who never appealed

Counsel for respondents in one of the acquiring body's appeals submitted that although they had filed no enhancement appeal, they were entitled to additional compensation under Order 41 Rule 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

The Court agreed in full. Those respondents had been parties to the reference in which additional compensation of Rs 100 with a 30 per cent addition — Rs 130 per square metre — had been awarded in a connected appeal, and they were entitled to the same, with statutory benefits and interest.

Five landowners' appeals were partly allowed and the award modified; both appeals by the acquiring body were dismissed. Amounts already deposited are to be released to the landowners with accrued interest.

Who argued it

Appearances as recorded in the judgment of the Court.

Frequently asked

What is the best exemplar in a land acquisition case?

The comparable transaction or judgment showing the highest properly supported value. The claimant is entitled to it.

Can I get more compensation without filing an appeal?

Sometimes. Order 41 Rule 33 of the Code allowed non-appealing claimants Rs 130 per square metre here.

Pressing for a higher rate in a land acquisition reference

  1. Search for awards and judgments on neighbouring land acquired near the same date, and put the best of them on record.
  2. Check whether the acquiring body appealed that judgment; finality makes it far harder to distinguish.
  3. Compare the Section 4 notification dates, and address escalation only if the gap warrants it.
  4. Remember Order 41 Rule 33 where co-claimants did not appeal — relief can still reach them.

Source. High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad, R/First Appeal No. 1862 of 2012 and connected appeals, decided 1 September 2026 by . This explainer is written from the judgment text as reported.

Claw tracks High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad and 24 other High Courts, reads every order handed back, and surfaces the directions that carry a deadline. clawlaw.in

Explore CLAW

The tools behind the guides

CLAW helps Indian advocates and firms manage cases, track courts and research the law.