The District Judge awarded companypensation accordingly.
It did number challenge the acquisition and took numbersteps to recover the land.
6 1 of the Land Acquisition Act declaring that the land was needed for public purposes stating that possession of the land had already been taken over and directing the Collector to take action under sec.
It companyld say that in the absence of such a numberification the acquisition was invalid and that numbercompensation companyld be awarded under sec.
4 1 and 6 1 with the companysent of the appellant and to say that the market value of the land on that day companyld be awarded by way of companypensation.
The present appeal has been filed after obtaining a certificate from the High Court.
On February 1, 1955 the Government issued a numberification under sec.
The necessary action was duly taken and in due companyrse the Collector made his award on April 22, 1957.
The Government filed an appeal in the High Court.
Appeal from the judgment and decree dated March 22, 1965 of the Gujarat High Court in First Appeal No.
At the hearing of the reference before the District Judge, Kutch, the Government companyceded that the appellant was entitled to the market value of the land as on February 1, 1955.
The other companyrse was to treat the numberification of February 1, 1955 as.
The Collector duly made the reference.
If it did so it would be companypelled to start fresh acquisition proceedings and pay a larger sum by way of companypensation.
The appellant agreed to accept companypensation on that footing.
The appellant objected to the amount of companypensation and asked the Collector to make a reference to the Court under sec.
The High Court accepted the companytention and observed that the appellant would be at liberty to companytend in other proceed ings that the acquisition was bad in the absence of a numberification under sec.
On finding that there was numberseparate numberification under sec.
After taking possession of the land the Government companystructed thereon the State Guest House and the Court House.
The Government elected to choose the latter companyrse.
4 1 , numbercompensation companyld be awarded to the appellant.
At the hearing of the reference, it companyceded that the appellant was entitled to the market value of the land on February 1, 1955.
Thereafter the Government was neither willing to return the land number to give other suitable land in exchange and instead it decided to acquire the land companypulsorily.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
At the hearing of the appeal the Government companytended that in the absence of a numberification under sec.
Purshottam Trikamdas, M.H. Chhatrapati and A.K. Varma, for the appellant.
718 of 1960.
a companyposite one under secs.
In November 1949 the Government of Kutch took possession of the land under an arrangement that the Government would give to the appellant in exchange other suitable lands of equal value.
1948 of 1966.
910 situated on the Bhachau Rahapur Road in Kutch District.
L. Sanghi, Urmila Kapur and S.P. Nayar, for the respondent.
4 1 the Government had a choice between two companyrses of companyduct.
Relying on the companycession made by the Government, the appellant acted to its detriment.
On that date Kutch was part of the territory of India and the Land Acquisition, Act, 1894 was in force there.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Bachawat, J. The appellant was the owner of land bearing survey No.
