BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 12.06.2008 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.SHIVAKUMAR A.S.No.603 and 604 of 1996 1) The Special Tahsildar (LA) Revenue Divisional Officer's Office, Tiruppathur 2) National Silkworm Seed Project Rep. By its Dirctor, CSB Complex, BTM Lay out Hosur Road, Madivala Bangalore 560 068 ... Appellants Vs. 1) G.Raju ... Respondent in A.S.No.603 2) C.Govinda Raju Gounder 3) G.Jegannadhan ...Respondents in A.S.No.604 These appeals have been filed by the Appellants under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act against the Judgment and Decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Tiruppathur in L.A.O.P.Nos.15 of 1991 and 16/1991 respectively. For Appellants : Mr.V.Ravi Special Government Pleader(AS) For Respondents : Mr.K.Gnanasambandam These appeals have been directed against the common judgment and decrees passed in L.A.O.P.Nos.15/1991 and 16/1991 dated 17.10.1995 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Tiruppatthur. 2. Totally an extent of 9.0 acres situated in the Elagiri Village in the Elagiri Hills, Tiruppatthur Taluk, Vellore District for organisation of Basis Biovolatine Silk Worm Seed Farm under National Silk Work Seed Project, Bangalore was acquired. Out of the 9.0 acres acquired by the Governemnt, 6.85 acres comprised in Survey No.278/1A belonged to one Govindan Gounder and his son Jagannathan Gounder, respondents in A.S.No.604/1996. The remaining extent namely 2.15 acres comprised in Survey No.279/3B belonged to Raji, the respondent in A.S.No.603/1996. 3. The notification under Section 4(1) of the Notification was published on 22.06.1983. After completion of 5A enquiry, the draft declaration was submitted to the Government. The same was approved in G.O.Ms.No.1174(Ind.) dated 20.09.1993 and published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 05.10.1983. As the total extent acquired in Survey No.278/1A was by mistake noted in the said notification as 0.85 acres. An erratum was published correcting the extent to 6.85 acres in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 22.12.1983. 4. The Land Acquisition Officer after collecting the data sales, in order to fix the market value of the acquired land sales statistics incorporating the sales of land that took place in the village for a period of 3 years preceding the date of publication of 4(1) notification after the period from 21.06.1980 to 22.06.1983 which numbered 205. After rejecting 201 sales for various reasons cited in the award of the Land Acquisition Officer, he took into consideration 4 sales relating to Survey Nos.280, which lies on the north side of the acquired land. Out of 4 sale deeds he relied on Document No.66 dated 21.07.1982 wherein an extent of one acre in Survey No.280/3 without any well or superstructure had been sold for a sum of Rs.8,000/- was taken as the data sale based on which award compensation for the acquired land fixed the market value at Rs.1,200/- per cent (Rs.1,20,000/- per acre). 5. So far as the LAOP No.15/1991 concerned, the total compensation was fixed at Rs.3,71,309.40 which included the additional compensation awarded over and above the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer which was fixed at Rs.3,13,443/- which amount was directed to be paid with an interest at the rate of 9% per annum for a period of one year from the date of taking possession and thereafter at the rate of 15% per annum. So far as LAOP No.16/1991 is concerned, the total compensation was fixed at Rs.12,05,892.40 for the enhanced amount of compensation after deducting the amount as per the award of the Land Acquisition Officer was worked out at Rs.10,17,962/- which amount was directed to be paid with an interest at the rate of 9% per annum for a period of one year from the date of taking possession and thereafter at the rate of 15% per annum. 6. The learned Subordinate Judge has also directed payment of interest at the rate of 9% per annum for the above said sum from the date of taking possession for a period of one year and at the rate of 15% per annum thereafter. 7. For various grounds set out in the Memoranda of Appeal as against the decree passed in LAOP No.15/1991, A.S.No.603 of 1996 has been filed. As against the decree in LAOP No.16/1991, A.S.No.604 of 1996 has been filed. 8. The points that arise for consideration in these appeals are: 1)whether the court below has fixed the market value of the acquired land as on the date of 4(1) notification erroneously at Rs.1,200/- per cent without any basis? 2)Whether the amount awarded as compensation in LAOP No.15/1991 is excessive and hence liable to be reduced? 3)Whether the amount awarded as compensation in LAOP No.16/1991 is excessive and hence liable to be reduced? 9. This court heard the submissions made by Mr.V.Ravi, learned Special Government Pleader (AS) on behalf of the Appellants/Referring officer and Mr.K.Gnanasambandam, learned counsel for the Respondents/claimants. The materials available on records were also perused. 10. These two appeals have been preferred against the common judgement of the learned Subordinate Judge, Tiruppatthur passed in LAOP Nos.15/1991 and 16/1991 and the decrees made there under. 11. The Respondent in A.S.No.603 of 1996 was the claimant in L.A.O.P.No.15/1991. The Respondents in A.S.No.604 of 1996 were the claimants in L.A.O.P.No.16/1991. Out of 9 acres of land acquired by the Government, the Respondent in L.A.O.P.No.15/1991 owned 2.15 acres comprised Survey No.279/3B. The respondents in A.S.No.604/1996 were the owners of 6.85 acres comprised in Survey No.278/1A. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.8,000/- per acre and awarded compensation for the acquired lands accordingly. The correctness of the award was put in issue before the learned Subordinate Judge, Tiruppatthur in LAOP Nos.15/1991 and 16/1991 which have been taken on file on the reference made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act as the Respondents herein /claimants accepted the compensation award by the Land Acquisition Officer under protest and requested such a reference being made to the court for fixing the reasonable compensation. The learned Subordinate Judge seems to have awarded compensation fixing the market value of the property acquired at the rate of Rs.1,200/- per cent. So far as the well in the land Respondents in A.S.No.604 of 1996 is concerned, was fixed at Rs.55,000/-. 12. The Appellants have not seriously disputed the correctness of the value fixed by the court below for the wells and trees. On the other hand the challenges confined to the fixation of the market value for the acquired land. 13. The learned Special Government Pleader advancing arguments on behalf of the appellants contended that the value fixed by the court below at the rate of Rs.1,200/- per cent was arbitrary, exorbitant and without any basis whatsoever and hence the same deserves to be interfered with by this Court in its appellate power. It is the further contention of the learned Special Government Pleader of course a vital one that though the lower court relied Ex.A1 to fix the market value and correctly stated that as per the said document, the value worked out at Rs.12,000/- per acre has committed a mistake in calculating the value per cent that by mistake instead of arriving at the correct figure of Rs.120/- per cent, the rate was wrongly calculated at Rs.1,200/- per cent that this mistake which crept in paragraph 13 of the judgment which resulted in catastrophe namely fixing an exorbitant amount as compensation for the acquired land at the rate of Rs.1,20,000/- per acre as against Rs.12,000/- per acre reflected by the document relied on by the court below. It is obvious from Ex.A1 relied on only by the sale deed produced by the respondents herein/claimants, the three acres of land along with trees standing thereon was sold for a sum of Rs.42,000/-. The value of trees were shown to be Rs.600/- The value of land alone was shown to be Rs.41,400/-. The copy of the very same document was produced on the side of the appellants/referring officer as Ex.B1. If the said value is taken, the value of the land will be Rs.13,800/- per acre. Pointing out the same, the learned counsel for the Respondents contended that as the appeals have been filed against the decree awarding enhancement of compensation taking the market value of the property at Rs.1,200/- per cent even though the respondents have not filed any appeal or cross-objection, they are entitled to contend that the market value should have been fixed at least on par with the value found in Ex.A1 and B1 and that there was no reason whatsoever assigned by the learned Subordinate Judge for taking a reduced value. While admitting that the learned Subordinate Judge, Tiruppatthur in paragraph 13 of the judgement has fixed the market value of the land at Rs.12,000/- and committed a mistake in calculating the rate per cent as he has calculated the market value at Rs.1,200/- per cent. The learned counsel for the respondents/claimants would contend that the Respondents who have not filed any appeal or cross objection are entitled to support the decree by stating that an issue should have been decided in his favour and that in this case though they may not be in a position to support the finding of the lower court fixing the market value at Rs.1,200/- per cent they could not be prevented from contending that the value reflected by the sale deeds relied on by the lower court namely Ex.A1 and B1 should have been adopted as the market value without any deduction. This court finds force and substance in the above said contention made by the learned counsel for the respondents. As the sale under the original Ex.A1 and B1 was made early 2 years prior to the date of 4(1) notification and in fact the second Respondent in A.S.No.604/1996 was the purchaser therein, the land itself was acquired fixing the market value below the value reflected in the said document cannot be justified. The learned Subordinate Judge after perusing the sales statistics collected by the Land Acquisition Officer has given a finding to the effect that from 1981 to 1983, the value of the land in the area remained static. This particular finding is not successfully challenged to be correct. Therefore, the adoption of the market value reflected in Ex.A1 cannot be held erroneous. 14. The learned Special Government Pleader representing the appellants has also conceded that market value has got to be fixed in accordance with the value reflected in Ex.A1 and that the Appellant would be satisfied if the mistakes committed by the learned Subordinate Judge is rectified and the decrees of the court below are modified accordingly. 15. The learned counsel for the respondents has also fairly conceded that the respondents may not have grievance if the market value reflected in Ex.A1 is adopted without any deduction and the mistake in calculation made by the lower court is rectified. 16. After going through the records, this Court is able to find that the Lower Court has committed an error in not only converting the market value per acre but also has committed an error in calculating the market value per acre as per the document relied on by the Sub-court namely Ex.A1. As pointed out supra, the market value per acre as per Ex.A1 is Rs.13,800/- whereas the learned Subordinate Judge has observed that as per the said document market value comes to Rs.12,000/- per acre. 17. Therefore this court comes to the conclusion that the ends of justice shall be met if the market value of the acquired land is fixed at Rs.13,800/- per acre (Rs.138/- per cent). Point No.1 is answered accordingly. Point No.2 18. The market value of the acquired land, as on the date of publication of Section 4(1) Notification is to be fixed at Rs.13,800/- per acre (Rs.138/- per cent) as decided in point No.1. Accordingly, in A.S.No.603/1996 the compensation is arrived at as follows: Market value of the property (2.15 acres) at the rate of Rs.13,800/- per acre : Rs. 29,670.00 Value of Trees : Rs. 500.00 ---------------- Total Market Value : Rs. 30,170.00 Add Solatium at 30% : Rs. 9,051.00 Increase in market value @ 12% per annum from the date of 4(1) notification till the date of award/ the date on which possession was taken, whichever is earlier (22.6.1983 to 25.06.1985) : Rs. 7,270.97 ---------------- Total Compensation payable : Rs. 46,491.97 Rounded off to : Rs. 46,492.00 The total amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer and the amount received by the respondents/ claimants is : Rs. 26,780.60 The enhanced compensation to which the respondents/claimants are entitled is : Rs. 19,711.40 The said amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 25.06.1985, the date on which possession was admittedly taken for the period of one year and at the rate of 15% per annum thereafter. 19. The appellants have not seriously contended that the valuation of the wells fixed by the lower court are disproportionate or excessive and hence the same has got to be confirmed. Point No.3: Similarly, in A.S.No.604/1996,the compensation is arrived at as follows: Market value of the property (6.85 acres) at the rate of Rs.13,800/- per acre : Rs. 94,530.00 Value of the well including platform wherein the motor pump-set had been installed : Rs. 55,000.00 Value of Trees : Rs. 1,000.00 --------------- Total Market Value : Rs. 1,50,530.00 Add Solatium at 30% : Rs. 45,159.00 Increase in market value on Rs.1,50,530/- @ 12% per annum from the date of 4(1) notification till the date of award/ the date on which possession was taken, whichever is earlier (22.6.1983 to 25.06.1985) : Rs. 36,279.00 ---------------- Total Compensation payable : Rs. 2,31,968.00 ---------------- The total amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer and the amount received by the respondents/ claimants is : Rs. 1,46,227.60 The enhanced compensation to which the respondents/claimants are entitled is : Rs. 85,740.00 The said amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 25.06.1985, the date on which possession was admittedly taken for the period of one year and at the rate of 15% per annum thereafter. 20. In the result, (a) both the appeals are allowed. (b) The award/decree in L.A.O.P.No.15/1991 is modified by fixing the total amount of compensation at Rs.46,492.00P. From the said amount deducting the amount already paid in accordance with the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, the enhanced compensation is fixed at Rs.19,711.40P. (c) The award/decree in L.A.O.P.No.16/1991 is modified by fixing the total amount of compensation at Rs.2,31,968/-. From the said amount deducting the amount already paid in accordance with the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, the enhanced compensation is fixed at Rs.85,740/-. (d) the above amounts shall be paid with an interest at the rate of 9% per annum for one year from 25.06.1985, admitted date of taking possession and thereafter at the rate of 15% per annum. (e) there shall be no order as to cost. .04.2008 Index : Yes Internet : Yes To The Subordinate Judge, Tiruppathur P.R.SHIVAKUMAR, J., ASR Predelivery Judgment in A.S.No.603 & 604/1996 Dated : 12.06.2008