IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 08.02.2008 CORAM : THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.TAMILVANAN A.S.No.1313 of 1995 and A.S.No.528 of 1996 A.S.No.1313 of 1995 The Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition) Housing Board, Hosur ... Appellant/ Referring Officer vs. Betha Venkatappa (Deceased) 2. Krishnappa 3. Mariamma 4. Kalavathy ... Respondents/ Claimants (R2 to R4 were impleaded as Legal Representatives of the deceased respondent, as per the order of the Court, dated 27.01.2004 made in C.M.P.Nos.17733 of 2003 and 700 of 2004 Appeal is filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act against the Judgment and Decree, dated 22.12.1994 made in L.A.O.P.No.191 of 1986 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Krishnagiri. For Appellant : Mr.V.Ravi, Spl.G.P. (AS) For Respondents : Mr.D.Shivakumar for R2 Mr.V.Sekar for R3 and R4 A.S.No.528 of 1996 The Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition) Housing Board, Hosur .... Appellant/ Referring Officer vs. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1. Santhamma 2. Sampankiappa 3. Krishnappa .... Respondents/ Claimants Appeal is filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act against the Judgment and Decree, dated 19.12.1994 made in L.A.O.P.No.169 of 1986 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Krishnagiri. For Appellant : Mr.V.Ravi, Spl.G.P. (AS) For Respondents : Mr.S.Rajasekar for R1 and R3 Mr.M.V.Krishnan for R2 COMMON JUDGMENT A.S.No.1313 of 1995 is arising out of the Judgment and Decree, dated 22.12.1994 made in L.A.O.P.No.191 of 1986 and A.S.No.528 of 1996 is arising out of the Judgment and Decree, dated 19.12.1994 made in L.A.O.P.No.169 of 1986 on the file of the Land Acquisition Tribunal / Sub Court, Krishnagiri. 2. As per L.A.O.P.No.191 of 1986, relating to A.s.No.1313 of 1995, an extent of 2.71 acres of land was acquired in S.No.749 of Hosur village by the appellant for constructing houses, under Tamil Nadu Housing Scheme. In A.S.No.1313 of 1995, the appellant / land acquisition office had fixed the market value of the land acquired at Rs.5,500/- per acre. The amount was received by the respondent / claimant under protest and at the request of the respondent / claimant, the matter was referred under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. 3. It is seen from the impugned Judgment that the claimant was examined as C.W.1, apart from marking Exs.A.1 to A.7 on the side of the respondent / claimant. On the side of the appellant, no witness was examined, however, Exs.B.1 to B.3 were marked by consent, out of which, Ex.B.1 is the award passed by the land acquisition officer under Section 11 of the Act. Sales statistics relating to the village for the period between 16.02.1977 and 06.10.1981 has been marked as Ex.B.2 and the topography showing the acquired land and the data land is marked as Ex.B.3. Commissioner's Report is marked as Ex.C.1, apart from the sketch prepared by him, Ex.C.2. 4. Considering the oral and documentary evidence, the land acquisition tribunal, decided the market value of the acquired land at Rs.1,00,644/- per acre, out of which, 25% of the value was https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ deducted towards developmental expenses and the appellant was directed to pay compensation at the aforesaid rate for the acquired land with other benefits, as per Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act. Aggrieved by which, appeal in A.S.No.1313 of 1995 has been preferred. 5. As per the land acquisition proceedings, relating to A.S.No.528 of 1996 and L.A.O.P.No.169 of 1986, an extent of 0.76 acres of land in S.No.750/2 of Avalapalli village, Hosur Taluk was acquired for the Housing Board Scheme. The appellant, Land Acquisition Officer has decided the market value of the acquired land at Rs.5,500/- per acre, accordingly, compensation was awarded. The respondent / claimant received the compensation amount under protest and at his request, the matter was referred under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. 6. It is seen that the third respondent, who was the third claimant before the Tribunal was examined as C.W.1, apart from marking documents Exs.A.1 to A.8, however, no witness was examined on the side appellant, but the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer has been marked as Ex.B.1. 7. The Tribunal, considering the evidence both oral and documentary and also the arguments advanced by both the learned counsel has held that the respondents herein were entitled to get compensation at Rs.86,000/- per acre, accordingly, entitled to get Rs.65,360/- for the acquired 0.76 acres of land along with Rs.11,190/- compensation for the well in the acquired land with other consequential benefits, as per Section 23 of the Act. Aggrieved by which, A.S.No.528 of 1996 has been preferred by the Special Tahsildar, Housing Board, Hosur. 8. When both the appeals were taken up for arguments, learned counsel appearing for the respondents drew the attention of this Court to the common Judgment of the Division bench of this Court, dated 16.09.2003 made in A.S.No.1223 of 1994, A.S.No.1224 of 1994 and A.S.No.62 of 1995, wherein the market value of the similarly placed lands relating to L.A.O.P.Nos. 166,167,168,170,172 and 173 of 1986 has been fixed at Rs.861.11/- per cent. Mr.V.Ravi, learned Special Government Pleader (AS) appearing for the appellant has also admitted the Judgment of the Division Bench, dated 16.09.2003 relating to the similarly placed lands of the same village, acquired by the land acquisition officer. 9. It is not in dispute that the Division Bench of this Court, by Judgment dated 16.09.2003 made in A.S.No.1223 of 1994, A.S.No.1224 of 1994 and A.S.No.62 of 1995 for the similarly placed adjacent lands has fixed the market value at Rs.861.11/- per cent. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 10. As it is a covered Judgment, the respondents / claimants in both the appeals are entitled to claim compensation on par with the other claimants in the connected L.A.O.P's. It is not in dispute that as per L.A.O.P.No.191 of 1996, an extent of 2.71 acres of land belonged to the deceased first respondent / claimant was acquired by the appellant, for which Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 07.01.1981 and therefore, the said claimant was entitled to get compensation for the market value at Rs.861.11/- per cent with other consequential benefits, as per Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act. While the appeal was pending, the claimant was reported dead and his son and daughters, being his legal representatives were arrayed as respondents 2 to 4. Respondents 3 and 4, married daughters of the deceased claimant have filed sworn affidavit that they have no objection for their brother, the second respondent in getting the amount of compensation, as per the Judgment of this Court. 11. In view of the separate affidavits filed by the respondents 3 and 4 in A.S.No.1313 of 1995, the second respondent, Krishnappa is entitled to receive the entire amount of compensation payable, as per the Judgment of this appeal, after deducting the amount already received by the respondents. 12. As per L.A.O.P.No.169 of 1986, relating to A.S.No.528 of 1996, an extent of 0.76 acres of land in S.No.750/2, Avalapalli Village, Hosur Taluk was acquired by the appellant. In view of the Division Bench Judgment of this Court, dated 16.09.2003 made in A.S.No.1223 of 1994, A.S.No.1224 of 1994 and A.S.No.62 of 1995, the respondents herein are also entitled to get compensation for the market value at Rs.861.11/- per cent, accordingly, the appellant is directed to pay compensation to the respondents for the acquired 76 cents of land at Rs.861.11/- per cent with the consequential benefits, as per Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act. 13. In the result, both the appeals are disposed of with the following directions : a) A.S.No.1313 of 1995 is disposed of with a direction to the appellant to pay compensation for the acquired 2.71 acres of land at Rs.861.11/- per cent with 12% additional amount from 07.01.1981, the date of 4(1) Notification till 31.03.1985, the date of taking over possession with 30% solatium and 9% interest for one year and 15% subsequent interest, as per Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, after deducting the amount already received by the respondents / claimants. The second respondent Mr.Krishnappa, s/o. Betha Venkatappa is entitled to receive the amount, in view of the affidavits filed by R3 and R4. In the appeal, both the parties are directed to bear their own costs. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ b) A.S.No.528 of 1996 is disposed of with a direction to the appellant to pay compensation for the acquired 76 cents of land at the rate of Rs.861.11/- per cent with 12% additional amount from 07.01.1981, the date of 4(1) Notification till 24.07.1985, the date of taking over possession with 30% solatium and 9% interest for one year and 15% subsequent interest, as per Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, after deducting the amount already received by the respondents / claimants. In the appeal, both the parties are directed to bear their own costs. Sd/- Deputy. Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar. tsvn To 1. The Subordinate Judge, Krishnagiri copy to The Record Keeper V.R. Section, High Court, Madras. 2 ccs to Government Pleader, Sr. 6632 and 6633 1 cc to Mr.M. V. Krishnan, Advocate, SR. 6835 1 cc to Mr.D. Shivakmaran, Advocate, SR. 6360 1 cc toMr.S. Rajasekar, Advocate, SR. 6611 A.S.Nos.1313 of 1995 and 528 of 1996 KU (CO) kk 12/8 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/