IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 28.08.2008 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.C.ARUMUGAPERUMAL ADITYAN A.S.No.932 of 2001 The Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition Officer), National Highways, Chennai-90. .. Appellant / Referring Officer -vs- D.Vadivel .. Respondent / Claimant (Cause title amended by substituting the respondent name as per order of the Court dt 30.12.2003 made in CMP.6668/02) Prayer:- This Appeal has been filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Officer against the judgment and decree dated 12.12.2000 in LAOP.No.116 of 1998 on the file of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Madurantakam. For appellant : Mr.V.Ravi, Special Government Pleader For respondent : Mr.V.Nicholas, Advocate JUDGMENT This appeal has been directed against the decree and judgment in LAOP.No.116 of 1998 on the file of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Madurantakam. 2.The Government have acquired 0.55 cents of land in S.No.1246/1 (0.27 cents) and S.No.1243/1 (0.28 cents) for the purpose of laying by-pass road between Km 80/2 and 82/0 of NH.45. 3.The Land Acquisition Officer, after following the procedures, had published notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act in the Government gazette on 13.01.1987 and in the locality on 27.11.1987. After going through the various sale deeds, the Land Acquisition Officer has fixed the compensation for the land acquired at Rs.1,300/- per cent. Aggrieved by the award of compensation passed by the Land Acquisition Officer the claimant had preferred his objection before him, which was referred to the Land Acquisition Tribunal by the Land Acquisition Officer under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.Before the land Acquisition Tribunal, the claimant/trustee of Arulmigu Arulieswhar Temple was examined as P.W.1 besides examining P.W.2 & P.W.3 and Ex.A.1 & Ex.A.2 were marked on the side of the claimant. On the side of the Referring Officer, the Special Deputy Tahsildar was examined as R.W.1 and Ex.R.1 to Ex.R.5 were marked. After giving due consideration to the evidence let in before the Tribunal both oral and documentary, the learned Land Acquisition Tribunal thought that the award of compensation fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer is meagre and is liable to be enhanced, has enhanced the same on the basis of Ex.C.2 to Rs.5,000/- per cent and passed the decree and judgment accordingly, along with usual solatium, interest on solatium etc, which necessitated the Government to prefer this appeal. 5.The point for determination in this appeal is whether the enhancement of award of compensation from Rs.1,300/- per cent to Rs.5,000/- per cent fixed by the Land Acquisition Tribunal in LAOP.No.116 of 1998 on the file of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Madurantakam, is liable to be set aside for the reasons stated in the memorandum of appeal? 6.On the side of the claimant Ex.C.1-sale deed dated 27.08.1986 and Ex.C.2, another sale deed dated 6.4.1987, were filed. But Ex.C.2- sale deed is after 4(1) notification. The Tribunal at paragraph 6 of its judgment has admitted the fact that Ex.C.2-sale deed is of the year 1987 (6.4.1987) i.e., three months after the publication of 4(1) notification in the gazette dated 13.1.1987. The Tribunal has enhanced and fixed the compensation as Rs.5,000/- on the ground that the potentiality of the land sold under Ex.C.2, and the land acquired are one and the same. But under Ex.C.1-sale deed dated 27.8.1986 one cent of land was sold for Rs.4,360/-. C.W.2 is the vendee under Ex.C.1 - sale deed dated 27.08.1986. In the chief-examination C.W.2 would admit that as per the guideline value for the land sold under Ex.C.1 one cent of land under Ex.C.1 was sold at the rate of Rs.4,360/- and that under Ex.C.1 he had purchased 6 cents of land in S.No.1233/2/C2. In the cross-examination, C.W.2 would admit that the land sold under Ex.C.1 is situated about 20 meters away from the land acquired. As per the evidence of C.W.1 – claimant, the land acquired is fit for construction. Even though at paragraph 5 to its judgment the Land Acquisition Tribunal has discussed and admitted that at the time of 4(1) notification one cent of land near the acquired land was sold at Rs.4,360/-, there is no reason given in the judgment for rejecting Ex.C.1 - sale deed. But on the other hand, while rejecting Ex.C.2 under which one cent of land was sold for Rs.5,000/- the Land Acquisition Tribunal has enhanced the compensation and awarded Rs.5,000/- per cent. Under such circumstance, I am of the view that as per Ex.C.1 the Land Acquisition Tribunal ought to have fixed the compensation for the land acquired as Rs.4,360/- per cent and not as Rs.5,000/- per cent, in the absence of any document of the period prior to 4(1) notification ie., 13.1.1987. Under Ex.C.1 – sale deed one cent of land was sold for Rs.4,360/-. Under such circumstance, I am of the view that the decree and judgment passed by the Tribunal is to be modified. Point is answered accordingly. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 7.In fine, the appeal is partly allowed and the decree & Judgment in LAOP.No.116 of 1998 on the file of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Madurantakam, is modified and the award of compensation for the land acquired is fixed as Rs.4,360/- per cent instead of Rs.5,000/- per cent awarded by the Land Acquisition Tribunal. The said award amount will carry usual solatium, interest on solatium and additional compensation as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act with proportionate costs. The learned Special Government Pleader represents that already the Government have deposited the entire enhanced award amount as per the order of this Court in CMP.15741 of 2001 dated 8.10.2001. If it is so, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the entire award amount with usual solatium, interest on solatium and additional compensation as per the provisions contemplated under the Land Acquisition Act, as per the decree passed in this appeal (A.S.No.932 of 2001) without furnishing any security. The Government is entitled to receive the balance of the amount in deposit to the credit of LAOP.No.116 of 1998 on the file of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Madurantakam, with accrued interest. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar ssv To 1.The Subordinate Judge, Madurantakam. 2.The Section Officer, V.R. Section, High Court, Madras. 1 cc To The Government Pleader, SR.48647 1 cc To Mr.V.Nicholas, Advocate, SR.48912 A.S.No.932 of 2001 MRD(CO) SRA(26/02/2009) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/