Prayer: Appeal Suit filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the Judgment and Decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Virudhunagar in L.A.O.P.No.75 of 1996, dated 10.11.2000.
Prayer: Appeal Suit filed under
Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the Judgment and Decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Virudhunagar in L.A.O.P.No.76 of 1996, dated 10.11.2000.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Kumar Additional Government Pleader For Respondent : No appearance A.S.No.285 of 2002 The Land Acquisition Officer / Revenue Divisional Officer, Aruppukottai. ... Referring Officer / Appellant -Vs- 1.M.K.Mariyappa Nadar 2.Jayaraj 3.Chandrasekaran 4.Mani 5.Koteswaran 6.Nagalakshmi 7.Venkatesan 8.Minor Backyaraj ... Claimants/Respondents (Minor represented by guardian and mother Nagalakshmi)
Prayer: Appeal Suit filed under
Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the Judgment and Decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Virudhunagar in L.A.O.P.No.81 of 1996, dated 10.11.2000.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Kumar Additional Government Pleader For Respondents : No appearance A.S.No.286 of 2002 The Land Acquisition Officer / Revenue Divisional Officer, Aruppukottai. ... Referring Officer / Appellant -Vs- Seeni Ahamad ... Claimant / Respondent
Prayer: Appeal Suit filed under
Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the Judgment and Decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Virudhunagar in L.A.O.P.No.82 of 1996, dated 10.11.2000.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Kumar Additional Government Pleader For Respondent : No appearance :COMMON JUDGMENT The appeals have been preferred by the Land Acquisition Officer / Revenue Divisional Officer, Aruppukottai, as against the judgment and decree of the Land Acquisition Tribunal / Sub Court, Virudhunagar in L.A.O.P.Nos.75, 76, 81 and 82 of 1996.
2.All the L.A.O.Ps referred to above were disposed of by a common judgment of the Land Acquisition Tribunal, dated 10.11.2000.
3.In all these cases, the claimants are the owners of small extents of land in Pelampatti Village, Virudhunagar Taluk and District. The lands were acquired from the claimants for the purpose of construction of residential quarters for the Central Excise Department staff by a notification issued under
Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (Central) dated 16.08.1989. The Land Acquisition Officer passed an award on 08.07.1991 fixing the market value at the rate of Rs.2.77 per square foot relying upon the sale deed dated 02.09.1986 in respect of the land in Survey No.24/1A2 measuring an extent of 8.28 cents. Aggrieved by the award of the Land Acquisition Officer, the claimants sought for reference to get just compensation under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. Upon reference, the Land Acquisition Tribunal has fixed the market value for the acquired lands at the rate of Rs.10/- per square foot.
4.The Tribunal has relied upon the sale deed dated 16.07.1987 which is for an extent of 1971 square feet and another sale deed dated 29.05.1988 and also another sale deed dated 26.08.1987 which are marked as Ex.C1 to C3 respectively. Though the claimants wanted compensation to be fixed on the basis of the market value for the acquired land at Rs.25/- per square foot and filed various sale deeds apart from examining four witnesses to support their case, the Tribunal has fixed the market value at the rate of Rs.10/- per square foot. Admittedly, the document relied upon by the claimants are prior in point of time. The documents filed by the claimants and the oral evidence of claimants namely C.W.1 to C.W.3 and C.W.4 would reveal that the market value cannot be less than Rs.15/- per square foot.
5.Even the document relied upon by the Land Acquisition Officer while passing the award was about three years prior to the notification under
Section 4(1) of the Act. The Tribunal though relied upon the documents namely the sale deeds in respect of similar land in the same vicinity, the main objection by the appellant was that the compensation for the acquired land cannot be fixed on the basis of the market value shown in the sale deeds which are in respect of smaller extent of lands. This argument was also considered by the Tribunal and ultimately, the Tribunal took into consideration that the acquired lands are located near National Highways and that land is nearby Government Circuit house and Women's College. R.W.1 (Deputy Tahsildar) admitted during cross examination that the acquired lands are nearby residential colonies, Public Works Department office, school, fuel station, hospital, etc. Since the acquired lands are located amidst several important places with all developments and infrastructure, the Tribunal fixed the market value at Rs.15/- per square foot and deducted 33+% from the market value towards development. In such circumstances, the contention of the learned Additional Government Pleader attacking the judgment and decree of the Tribunal relying upon the sale deeds Exs.C1 to C3 is not justified.
6.The learned Additional Government Pleader relied upon a judgment of learned Single Judge of this Court in a batch of cases in A.S.(MD)No.793 to 796 of 2001. It was pointed out that the said judgment is also in respect of the lands covered by the same notification by which the subject matter of these appeals relates to. This Court found that the sale deeds marked as Ex.C1 to C3 therein indicate the value for the lands at Rs.15/- per square foot. The learned Judge has also accepted the enhancement of 10% per year taking into consideration the fact that the sale exemplars were 2 years prior to the date of 4(1) notification. However, purely by guess work and adopting multiple modes of calculation fixed the value at Rs.6/- per square foot. This Court is unable to follow the said judgment as there is no definite findings as to market value to be taken and the percentage of deduction to be adopted based on reasons. In this case, the value from the sale exemplars is arrived at Rs.15/- per square foot by the Tribunal. This was also justified in the above judgment. Then a further increase of 20% to 30% is also permissible towards appreciation. Hence, the market value as on the date of 4(1) notification as per the market value shown in Ex.C1 and Ex.C3 can be arrived at Rs.17.50 per square foot. Even after allowing 40% deduction, the market value has to be fixed at a rate not less than Rs.10/- per square foot.
7.The acquisition was initiated long back and the notification under
Section 4(1) of the Act was issued in the year 1989. The Land Acquisition Officer has fixed the market value at Rs.2.77 per square foot. By virtue of the long delay in disbursement of the compensation to the land owners, the land owners have suffered a lot and the compensation that may be given to the claimants with accrued interest will not be enough to purchase a very meagre extent of land. Hence, serious prejudice and irreparable injury had already been caused to the claimants. Pendency of these appeals for a period of more than two decades is also a factor which can be taken note of. Considering the hardships and mental agony experienced by the claimants on account of the long delay in disbursement of the compensation, this Court find that this is not fit case in which this Court can interfere with the award of the Land Acquisition Tribunal. Hence, all these appeals are dismissed. However, there is no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
8.Since there is no representation for the claimants / respondents in all the appeals, office is directed to issue a copy of this judgment to the claimants / respondents.
To
1.The Subordinate Judge, Virudhunagar.
2.The Section Officer, Vernacular Records, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai..