BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE : 04.08.2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.C.ARUMUGAPERUMAL ADITYAN A.S.No.962 of 2001 and C.M.P.No.64 of 2007 The Special Tahsildar Land Acquisition, Adi Dravidar Welfare, Salem .. Appellant / Referring Officer Vs. Nallammal .. Claimant / Respondent Prayer:-This appeal has been preferred under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act against the decree and judgment dated 28.10.1993 in LAOP.No.32 of 1989 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Salem. For Appellant : Mr.V.Ravi, Special Government Pleader For Respondent : Mr.P.Jagadeesan, Advocate JUDGMENT This appeal has been directed against the judgment in LAOP.No.32 of 1989 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge / Land Acquisition Tribunal, Salem. 2.The Government has acquired 0.59.5 hectares of land in S.No.60/2C, 60/2B in Achankuttapatti village, Salem, along with a tiled house, cattle shed, thrashing floor, water tub and 28 coconut trees. 3.After following the formalities, the learned Land Acquisition Officer has published the notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette on 29.10.1986, and passed an Award No.2/88-89 dated 14.03.1989 fixing the compensation as Rs.19,500/- per acare. The Land Acquisition officer has fixed the compensation for the acquired land as 0.45 paise per sq.foot. Aggrieved by the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer the claimant had preferred https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ objections before the Land Acquisition officer, who in turn had referred the same to the Land Acquisition Tribunal under Section 18 of the Act. 4.Before the Land Acquisition Tribunal C.W.1 to C.W.3 were examined on the side of the claimant and Ex.C.1 to Ex.C.4 were marked. On the other hand there was no oral evidence let in on the side of the Referring Officer, but Ex.R.1 to Ex.R.4 alone were marked. 5.After going through the oral and documentary evidences, the Land Acquisition Tribunal has allowed the appeal, thereby enhanced the compensation from 0.45 paise per sq.foot to Rs.1/50 per sq.foot, and also proportionately increased the compensation awarded to the coconut trees as Rs.200/- per tree, Rs.20,000/- for the tiled house, Rs.10,000/- for the thatched house and also Rs.25,000/- to the Well, thrashing floor etc., and also awarded Rs.5,000/- for the loss of occupation and another sum of Rs.7,500/- for migrating from one place to another due to dwelling house being acquired by the Government with usual solatium, interest on solatium etc. Aggrieved by the judgment of the Land Acquisition Tribunal the Government / Referring Officer has preferred this appeal. 6.Heard the learned Special Government Pleader for the appellant as well as the learned counsel for the respondent. 7.The Land Acquisition Tribunal has enhanced the compensation on the basis of Ex.C.1-sale deed dated 20.08.1988 under which 773 sq.ft of land was sold for Rs.1,600/- and the said sale deed is two years prior to 4(1) notification, which was published on 29.10.1986. The claimant basing his reliance on Ex.C.1 had claimed that the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer is to be enhanced from 0.45 paise per sq.foot to Rs.2/- per sq.foot. Relying on LACC Vol.2 1988 All India Land Acquisition & Compensation Cases at Page 491 (Chinmanlal Hargovinddas Vs. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Poona & Ant), the Land Acquisition Tribunal thought it fit to deduct 25% towards improvement of the land to be carried out by the Government, has fixed the compensation as Rs.1/50 per sq.foot. While enhancing and fixing the compensation, the Land Acquisition Tribunal has taken into consideration the potentiality of the land ie., the land is situated near Salem-Karur National High ways and the acquired land is not an agricultural land and it is situated amidst housing plots and actually the dwelling house of the claimant alongwith his cattle shed and thrashing floor, water tub, Well, were acquired by the government for the purpose of providing house sites to the landless Adi-dravidars. The claimant has not preferred any cross-objection. Under such circumstance, I do not find any reason to reduce the compensation already enhanced and fixed by the Land Acquisition Tribunal. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 8.In fine, the appeal is dismissed confirming the judgment of the Land Acquisition Tribunal in LAOP.No.32 of 1989 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Court, Salem. It is seen that only part of the award amount of Rs.1,59,924/- was deposited by the Government on 22.10.1999 to the credit of the award in LAOP.No.32 of 1989. Time for deposit of balance amount is one month from this date. Connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs. Sd/- Asst. Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar ssv To, 1) The Additional Subordinate Judge, Salem. Copy to: The Section Officer, V.R. Section, High Court, Madras. +1 cc to Mr.P.Jagadeesan, Advocate, SR.No.42491 1 cc To The Government Pleader, SR.42224 A.S.No.962 of 2001 and C.M.P.No.64 of 2007 VM(CO) SMK/01.9.08 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/