The Special TahsildarAdi Dravidar WelfareGudiyatham v. N.Sakunthala

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 03.07.2009CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPALA.S.No.440 of 2002The Special TahsildarAdi Dravidar WelfareGudiyatham .. Appellant/Referring Officer-vs-N.Sakunthala .. Respondent/claimantThis appeal is filed under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act,against the Judgment and Decree dated 28.9.2001 L.A.O.P.No.25/99 onthe file of Subordinate Judge,Gudiyatham.For appellant :: Mr.V.Ravi,Spl.Govt.PleaderFor respondent :: Mr.D.RajagopalJ U D G M E N T This appeal arises out of an Award dated 28.9.2001 passed inL.A.O.P.No.25/99 by the learned Subordinate Judge (Land AcquisitionTribunal) Gudiyatham,Vellore District.2. The Government has acquired a total extent of 0.76.5 Hectares(1 Acre 89 cents) in S.No. 199/1B1 in Sethuvandai Village, GudiyathamTaluk, Vellore District for the purpose of providing house sites tothe landless people belonging to the Arunthathiyars Community. Thesaid land as per village accounts has been standing in the name ofSakuntala w/o Purushotohama Naidu and Sreevathi Swamy BoorvanandaMaharaji bearing batta No.420 and they do have equal share. Theaforesaid two individuals have appointed K. Balaji as their Power ofAttorney as per General Power of Attorney document No.36/94 and 37/94respectively. 3. After complying with the formalities, the Land AcquisitionOfficer has published a Notification under Section 4(1) of the LandAcquisition Act(hereinafter referred to as' the Act') in theGovernment Gazette No.(3D) Adi Dravidar Welfare Department, dated29.1.1993 and 3.3.1998 and the same has been published in thevernacular daily viz., 'Vetrimalai' on 28.2.1993. An enquiry in theSethuvandai village under Section 5(A) of the Act has been conductedon 13.5.1993. In the acquired land village notices have been affixedin a public place and Tom Tom was also made. The owners of the landhave not participated in Section 5(A) enquiry. But their power agentK.Balaji has appeared and has given statement before the LandAcquisition Officer. The draft declaration Notice as per Section 6 of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the Land Acquisition Act has been published in Tamil Nadu Gazette on20.10.1993 and also the same has been published in the daily"Viduthalai "and "Kumarimurasu" dated 28.10.1993. The said LandAcquisition Officer has fixed the compensation for the acquired landat Rs.72,946.44ps and also awarded 30% solatium of Rs.21,883.93psand besides awarding a sum of Rs.12,111.09 being 12% interest andtotalling in all a sum of Rs.1,06,941/- has been awarded which hassince been received by the power agent Balaji under protest. 4. The Land Acquisition Officer in his award has stated that 14sales have taken place in the acquired land Village one year prior tothe publication of Section 4(1) Notice and has taken into account thesale deed dated 14.10.1992( document No.4177) for Rs.44,000/- inrespect of S.No.120/2C Punja measuring an extent of 0.89 acre andS.No.120/2D1 Punja 0.25 aggregating in all 1 acre 14 cents.5.The respondent/claimant ,not satisfied with the award passedby the Land Acquisition Officer has filed his objection before thesaid Officer who in turn has referred the same as per Section 18 ofthe Act to the Land Acquisition Tribunal/Principal Subordinate Judge,Gudiyatham.6. Before the Land Acquisition Tribunal, respondent/claimant hasexamined himself as C.W.1 and Exs.C1 to C4 were marked on the side ofthe claimant and on the side of appellant/referring Officer, the HeadClerk, Office of Adi Dravidar Welfare Department, Gudiyatham wasexamined as R.W.1 and Exs R1 to R4 were marked. 7. On an overall appreciation of an oral and documentaryevidence adduced on both sides and after providing due opportunitiesto the respective parties and after hearing the arguments of eithersides, the Land Acquisition Tribunal, viz., The learned PrincipalSubordinate Judge Gudiyatham, has fixed the compensation for theacquired land a sum of Rs.2000/-can be fixed per cent and accordinglydetermined the same and also granted 30% solatium and also theinterest at 12% p.a from the date of taking possession from 1.9.1994etc and later it has granted 15% interest till the money is paid.8. Aggrieved against the award passed by the Land AcquisitionTribunal/Principal Subordinate Judge, Gudiyatham, theappellant/referring Officer has preferred this Appeal before thisCourt.9. The point arises for determination in this appeal is"Whether the award dated 28.9.2001 passed by theLand Acquisition Tribunal/Principal SubordinateJudge, Gudiyatham is just and proper in the eye oflaw.10. Heard the learned Special Government Pleader(AS) forappellant and Mr.D.Rajagopal, learned counsel for respondent and thisCourt has paid its anxious consideration to the arguments advanced oneither sides. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

11. Contentions ,Discussion and Finding:The learned Special Government Pleader(AS) urges before this Courtthat the Tribunal has committed an error in enhancing the marketvalue exorbitantly from Rs.38,596/- per acre(fixed by the LandAcquisition Officer) to Rs.2,000/- per cent in disregard to theprocedure laid down under the Land Acquisition Act and further Exs A3and A4 sale deeds have not been proved by the respondent/claimantside and more over the similar extent found in Exs A3 and A4 oughtnot to have been taken note of by the Tribunal and the Tribunal hasnot considered Ex B2 data land which is also a part of the land whichhas been separated from a larger extent and therefore the value forthe acquired land 1 acre 89 cents land at Rs.72,946.44ps and alsoawarded 30% solatium of Rs.21,883.93ps and interest atRs.12,111.09ps totalling in all Rs.1,06,941.46ps is quite areasonable and fair one and these aspects have not been taken noteof by the Tribunal in a proper perspective and therefore prays forallowing the appeal to secure the ends of justice.12. In response, the learned counsel appearing for therespondent/claimant submits that the Tribunal has taken into accountof the facts and circumstances of the present case in a cumulativemanner and has awarded compensation of Rs.2,000/- per cent with otherusual heads of compensation as per the Land Acquisition Act and atthis stage, the same need not be interferred by this Court since theaward passed by the Tribunal is a just, fair and equitable one.13.C.W.1(power agent) during his examination before the Tribunalhas deposed that near the acquired land houses, schools,P.W.D.Officeand Medical Department Office(AIDS) and the acquired land is situatedin a highly valuable place and near the acquired lands, there arehouses and around the acquired lands, within a radius of 1 kilometre, there are houses and Saraswathi Vidyalaya School inGudiyatham is a big one where approximately 4000 students arestudying and further that seven years before the date of acquisitionaround the acquired land, the lands have been divided as plots andhouses have been built and near the acquired land, land of NazirMunnissa in S.No.190, by means of sale deed dated 17.8.1989 has beensold at the rate of Rs.9.85ps per sq.ft and cost of vacant site 456sq.ft is Rs.4,500/- and near the acquired land in S.No.190, oneMrs.Lalitha has purchased 600sq.ft vacant land at the rate of Rs.10/-per sq.ft for Rs.6000/- and Exs C3 and C4 are the said sale deedsand the value of the acquired land at the time of acquisition persq.ft has been at Rs.17.50ps and the cost of one cent at the time ofacquisition has been about Rs.7,630/- and therefore prays fordetermining the compensation at the rate of Rs.17.50 per sq.ft forthe acquired land 1 acre and 89 cents and for fix the same atRs.7,630/- per cent.14. Ex C1 is the power of attorney dated 28.2.1994 issued infavour of the witness C.W.1 Balaji by one Sakunthala. Ex C2 is also apower of attorney document dated 28.2.1994 given by Purananda Maharajin favour of C.W.1 Balaji. Ex C3 is the certified copy of sale deeddated 17.8.1989 and Ex C4 is also the certified copy of sale deeddated 15.2.1990. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

15. R.W.1, the Head Clerk of Adidravidar Welfare Department atGudiyatham, in his evidence has deposed that the acquired land inissue has been acquired for providing house sites to N.S.K.Nagar,Arunthathiyars people at Nellorepettai and that therespondent/claimant has received a sum of Rs.1,06,941/- underprotest and that the sale statistics document is Ex R1 and thesample land is Ex R2 and the original Chitta Adangal for the acquiredland is ExR3 and the plan in original Ex R4.16. The evidence of R.W.1 is to the effect that the acquiredland is situated very near to the road and that the same is situatedin Gudiyatham -Katpadi Main Road and Ex R1 document land in ItemNo.14, bearing Punjai Survey No.82/2 is situated at the distance ofone furlong from the acquired land and near the acquired land , thereis Saraswathi Vidyalaya Matriculation School which is the big schoolamong many schools at Gudiyatham and a marriage hall is alsosituated at a distance of one furlong towards Katpadi from theacquired lands and the housing board is also at a distance of onefurlong from the acquired land and at a distancne of one furlong fromthe acquire land G.K.M.College is situated and near acquireid land,there is a polytechnic and that he is not aware of Exs R3 and R4 saledeeds and that they have acquired only the land.17. A perusal of Exs C3 and C4, do clearly indicate that thatlands near the acquireid land has been sold out at a price ofRs.4000/- after same has been converted into plots and thereafteronly the price has been increased.18. In majority of cases relating to the land acquisitionmatters, the Land Acquisition Tribunal is empowered to indulge incertain amount of conjectures and guess work and in arriving at anexact compensation, no straight jacket cast iron formula can beadopted. However, one cannot loose sight of the important fact thatthe locality of the lands wherein it is situated, its potentialityvalue, value which will increase in future and other variousdecisive factors will go a long way in determing the compensation.The actual amount of compensation to be awarded to therespondent/claimant must be awarded by a Tribunal. Equally,while so,awarding fair and just compensation, the Tribunal must take note ofthe important fact that there should not be an undue burden on thepublic exchequer. After all, when the compensation is fixed by theTribunal or Court of law and when the same is enhanced, then theincreased compensation will have to be paid by the acquisition bodyto the claimant.19. On a careful consideration of an oral and documentaryevidence adduced on either sides and taking note of the fact that theacquired land is situated in a very important place and also bearingin mind that near the acquired land, there is a big school SaraswathiVidyalaya with a strength of around 4000 students and otherGovernment Offices are situated, this Court is of the considered viewthat the amount of compensation per cent fixed by the Tribunal atRs.2,000/- cannot be said to be either exorbitant or excessive. As a https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ matter of fact, the Tribunal has not deducted any amount towardsdevelopment charges. At this stage, the learned Special GovernmentPleader(AS) submits that towards development charges, 1/3 can bededucted from the compensation of Rs.2000/- per cent awarded by theTribunal. It is to be noted that the deduction of 1/3 from and outof the compensation amount awarded towards development charges is notan inflexible rule. What is the extent of percentage to be deductedtowards development charges will depend upon the each facts andcircumstances of the case which float on the surface. 20. As far as the present case is concerned, this Court opinesthat 25% can be deducted towards development charges and if the saidamount of Rs.500/- is deducted, then the compensation for theacquired land can be fixed at Rs.1,500/- per cent and accordinglythis Court fixes the compensation for the acquired land at Rs.1,500/- per cent and in regard to the amounts awarded in respect ofother items like solatium and interest by the Tribunal, this Court isnot interfering with the same since they are just , fair,reasonableand an equitable one and therefore in that view of the matter, thisCourt allows the appeal in part to prevent an aberration of justice.21. In fine, the appeal is partly allowed and for the acquiredland, the compensation of Rs.1,500/- per cent is fixed and in otherrespects, the award of the Tribunal is affirmed. Considering thefacts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as tocosts. The respondent/claimant is at liberty to receive the amount towhich he is entitled to from the Tribunal by filing necessaryapplication as per Civil Rules of Practice in the manner known to law.Sd/Asst.Registrar/true copy/Sub Asst.RegistrarsgTo1. The Principal Subordinate Judge, Gudiyatham.2. The Section Officer,V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.1 cc To Mr.D.Rajagopal, Advocate, SR.28921.1 cc To The Government Pleader, SR.28449.A.S.No.440/2002GV(CO)RVL 23.07.2009