IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE: 07.02.2008 CORAM: The Honourable Mr.Justice S.TAMILVANAN A.S.No.666 of 1997 Subbaraya Gounder ... Appellant/Claimant -vs- 1.The Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition), Namakkal Rural Scheme, Namakkal. 2.The Executive Engineer-cum- Administrative Officer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Salem Housing Unit, Salem-8. ... Respondents/Respondents This appeal is filed under Section 96 of C.P.C.r/w 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against the judgment and decree made in L.A.O.P.No.68 of 1990 dated 30.09.1996 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Namakkal. For Appellant : Mr.T.Dhanyakumar For R-1 : Mr.V.Ravi Spl.G.P.(A.S.) For R-2 : Mr.K.Chelladurai, TNHB JUDGMENT This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree made in L.A.O.P.No.68 of 1990 dated 30.09.1996 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Namakkal. 2.The appellant herein was the claimant in the L.A.O.P. before the Land Acquisition Tribunal. As per the reference made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, lands belonging to various persons in different survey numbers in Kondichettypatty Village, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Namakkal Taluk, was acquired by the first respondent, Special Tahsildar for the construction of Houses by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Salem Housing Unit. Accordingly, the lands in S.Nos.46/1 an extent of 1.66 acres, in S.No.46/3B1 an extent of 64 cents were acquired after the award enquiry was passed by the first respondent in award No.19/86-87, dated 04.03.1987. The amount was received by the appellant under protest as the same was inadequeate and at the request of the appellant, the matter was referred to the Land Acquisition Tribunal, under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, in short 'the Act'. For the aforesaid land acquisition, Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published in the Official Gazattee on 11.09.1985. 3.The Land Acquisition Tribunal had tried this L.A.O.P.No.68 of 1996 along with the connected land acquisition original petitions and delivered a common order dated 30.09.1996. It is seen from the impugned judgment that on the side of the claimants P.Ws.1 & 2 were examined apart from marking Exs.A1 to A6, in order to substantiate their claim for enhancement of compensation. The then head Surveyor of the second respondent herein was examined as R.W.1 and on the side of the respondents, Exs.B1 to B9 were marked. As per the impugned common judgment the acquired land in S.No.46/1, belonged to the appellant is stated to be an extent of 18,077.4 sq.ft.(1.66acre) and in S.No.46/5 & 6 an extent of 18,730.8sq.ft. and as such a total extent of 36,808.2sq.ft. The Trial Court while fixing the market value has deducted 35% of the land towards development and only for the balance of 23,925.3sq.ft., has awarded compensation at Rs.6/-per sq.ft. to be paid with 12% additional amount from 23.02.1983, the date of 4(1) notification till 16.03.1987 the date of award and also 30% solatium and interest as per the Land Acquisition Act. 4.As contended by the learned counsel for the appellant while deciding the market value, the Tribunal could not have deducted 35% of the land, so as to get the said portion of the land free of costs and the Tribunal could have awarded cost for the entire land acquired from the appellant. While computing the market value of the acquired land, the authority or the Tribunal must take the market price of a similarly placed land that was sold prior to the date of 4 (1) notification. It is reasonable on the part of the Tribunal to deduct reasonable percentage of the value towards developmental expenses if the data land is a smaller extend or a developed land. Further, the Tribunal cannot deduct any portion of land, on the ground that the data land is a developed land since it would amount to taking such portion of land free of costs against law. It is seen that the Land Acquisition Tribunal has decided the market value of the acquired land at Rs.6/-per sq.ft. after deducting 1/4th of the land acquired. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5.During the course of arguments, it is brought to the notice of this Court that in a similar matter a Division Bench of this Court by judgment dated 29.04.2003 has decided the market value of the acquired land at RS.4.66 per sq.ft. As per the market value, land value has to be calculated and the claimant is entitled to 12% additional amount, 30% solatium and interest as per Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act. It is not in dispute that the aforesaid judgment of this Court, is squarely applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case, since the aforesaid lands were also acquired for the very same purpose. It has been admitted by both the learned counsel that the judgment dated 29.04.2003 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in A.S.No.632 of 1998 is applicable to the acquired lands relating to this appeal. 6.It is not in dispute that an extent of 36,808.2 sq.ft. of lands in S.No.46/1, 46/5 and 46/6 were acquired by the first respondent. As submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant, deducting a portion of land towards the developmental expense is not legally permissible though in deciding the market value of the acquired land, while a smaller extend of land or a developed land is taken into consideration, reasonable percentage of deduction towards developmental expense is possible, and therefore the appellant/claimant is entitled to get compensation for the entire acquired land of 36,808.2 sq.ft. at Rs.4.66 per sq.ft. with 12% additional amount from 23.02.1983, the date of 4(1) notification till the date of taking over possession, 30% solatium, 9% interest for the said amount for one year from the date of award and subsequently 15% interest for the amount due and payable as decided in the connected appeal referred above. 7.In the result, the appeal is disposed of as per the aforesaid decision of this Court. There shall be no order as to the costs. Sd/- Asst. Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar. Smi https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To, 1.The Subordinate Judge, Villupuram. 2.The Record Keeper, V.R.Section, High Court, Madras-104 + 1 CC to the Government Pleader SR NO.6243 A.S.No.666 of 1997 BS {CO} TP/25.6.08. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/