Landowners Near Kadi Get Rs 130 More A Square Metre From ONGC
ONGC acquired farmland in Mehsana district for a drilling project more than two decades ago. The Gujarat High Court has raised the compensation using an award ONGC itself chose not to challenge.
The Court held that where more than one exemplar is on record, the landowner is entitled to the highest comparable value. The Reference Court discarded a higher award without justification. An award of an additional Rs 100 per square metre for nearby Merda, accepted by ONGC and final whatever the amount, was the best indicator. With 30 per cent for the gap between notifications, landowners get an additional Rs 130 per square metre.
- The best exemplar wins. A court cannot pick the lower of two comparable awards without reason.
- Not appealing has consequences. ONGC said the sum was too small to challenge; the award still binds as a benchmark.
- Neighbouring villages count — these lie within about five kilometres of each other.
- Claimants who did not appeal also benefit, under Order 41 Rule 33 of the CPC.
- Court
- High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad
- Bench
- Justice HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA, Justice HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
- Citation
- First Appeal No. 1862 of 2012 and connected appeals
- Case
- First Appeal No. 1862 of 2012 and connected appeals
- Decided
- 1 September 2026
- Outcome
- Landowners' appeals partly allowed; ONGC's appeals dismissed
The acquisition
ONGC proposed to acquire parcels of land in Mehsana district for a drilling project. Land in village Ambaliyara, Kadi taluka, was acquired under notifications of 1999 and 2003.
The Land Acquisition Officer awarded Rs 22 per square metre for the 1999 acquisition and Rs 18.70 for the 2003 one. On reference, the Civil Court at Mehsana enhanced compensation, relying on its own earlier awards.
Landowners appealed for more; ONGC appealed against the enhancement.
How the High Court fixed the value
No sale instances were produced; the evidence was previous awards for nearby villages — Merda, Meda Adaraj, Ambaliyara and Laxmanpura — whose boundaries adjoin, roughly five kilometres apart.
It is settled law that where more than one exemplar is available, the landowner is entitled to the benefit of the highest comparable value. The Reference Court discarded the higher exemplar without any justifiable reason, and the Court found its explanation, based on village boundaries, unconvincing.
An award for Merda granting an additional Rs 100 per square metre had been accepted by ONGC and attained finality. ONGC said it had not challenged it because of the small amount; the Court held that once an award is final, irrespective of the amount, it must be accepted as the best indicator of market value.
The result
In the lead appeal, the landowners were held entitled to an additional Rs 100 per square metre, plus 30 per cent for the three-year gap between the notifications — Rs 130 in all — over the Land Acquisition Officer's award, with statutory benefits and interest. The connected landowners' appeals were modified on the same reasoning.
ONGC's two appeals were dismissed. Respondent claimants in one of them, who had not filed their own appeal, were held entitled to the enhanced amount under Order 41 Rule 33 of the CPC.
Amounts deposited are to be released to the landowners, with interest, and parties are liable for any deficit court fee.
Who argued it
Appearances as recorded in the judgment of the Court.
Frequently asked
Which earlier award should set the value of my acquired land?
Where several comparable awards exist, the landowner is entitled to the highest comparable value.
Does an award the acquirer did not appeal count as evidence?
Yes. Once it has attained finality, the Court held it must be accepted as the best indicator, whatever the amount.
Seeking enhancement in an old land acquisition
- Collect every award for neighbouring villages, not just the one the Reference Court used.
- Find out which awards the acquiring body accepted; those are hard for it to disown.
- Plot the villages on a map to show proximity and comparability.
- If you did not appeal but are a respondent, invoke Order 41 Rule 33 to share the enhancement.
Source. High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad, First Appeal No. 1862 of 2012 and connected appeals, decided 1 September 2026 by Justice HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA, Justice HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI. 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