Judgment:
(Prayer: The Civil Revision Petitions have been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge, Sivagangai in L.A.C.M.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 1997 dated 01.02.1999 modifying the Award No.22/95-96 dated 22.03.1996.)
1. The Civil Revision Petitions have been filed against judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge, Sivagangai in L.A.C.M.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 1997 dated 01.02.1999 modifying the Award No.22/95-96 dated 22.03.1996, in and by which, the lower appellate Court had enhanced the compensation to the respondents herein.
2. Since the issue involved in both the Civil Revision Petitions are one and the same, they are taken up together and by consent, they are disposed of, by a common order.
3. The petitioner in both the Civil Revision Petitions would aver among other things in the affidavits filed in support of the Civil Revision Petitions that the lands measuring about 1.77.3 Hectares in S.Nos.116/1, 116/2A, 116/2B1, 116/3 and 116/4 in Katchathanaliur village in Ilayangudi Taluk, Sivagangii District was acquired for the purpose of free house sites to Adi Dravidar families under of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land For Harijan Welfare Schemes Act, 1978 (Tamil Nadu Act 31 of 1978). Accordingly, 4(1) Notification was published on 24.02.1996 in Gazette No.22 and subsequently, 5(1) enquiry was held on 22.3.1996. During the enquiry, the respondents have not filed any objection for the Land Acquisition proceedings so also, for the enhanced compensation. The Land Acquisition Officer, after careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and relying upon the sale deed dated 22.8.1994 in Ref.No.1371/94 measuring about 1.00 acre in S.No.107/1 fixed the market value of Rs.20,748/- per Hectare i.e. Rs.84/- per cent.
3.1.Not satisfied with the Award, the respondents herein had preferred the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal Nos.1 and 2 of 1997 on the file of the Sub-Court, Sivaganga, claiming enhanced compensation at the rate of Rs.2,50,000/- per Hectare. However, the Lower Appellate Court had enhanced the market value to Rs.500/- per cent.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that the lower appellate Court, while enhancing the amount did not consider the documents produced by the petitioner and interest awarded by the Court below is also on the higher side. Such enhancement is unreasonable and against the government norms and therefore, prays for interference.
5. Per contra, the respondents would submit that the acquired land is in Paramakudi and Manamadurai Town and opposite to the acquired land, there is a temple and on both sides, there are electrical poles and in S.No.116/4, a part of the property had already been sold to one Sameeth and when the property was sold, there was no notification or whisper that the Government is going to acquire the land in question. Only in the year 1995, the land was proposed to be acquired and the said land is fit for residential purpose and therefore, considering all the above circumstances and based on the earlier sale deed and also the part of the land which was sold even prior to the acquisition proceedings, the lower appellate Court had fixed the value of the land at the rate of Rs.500/- per cent which is quite reasonable. In fact, the Court below had deducted 40% towards developmental charges, which was not warranted at all. Eventually, he prays for the dismissal of the Civil Revision Petitions.
5. Considered the rival submissions made on either side and perused the material available on record.
6. It is seen that the learned Judge by taking into consideration the sale of the part of the property which was sold even prior to the land acquisition proceedings had fixed the value of the acquired land is Rs.800/- per cent and by deducting 40% towards developmental charges, had fixed Rs.500/- per cent, which is very very reasonable and the solatium awarded by the Court below is also quite reasonable. However, as to the interest concerned, as per Section 12 of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land For Harijan Welfare Schemes Act, 1978 (Tamil Nadu Act 31 of 1978), the payment of interest for such acquisition is 6% only. Therefore, this Court modifies the rate of interest portion alone from 9% to 6% and in all other aspects, the orders of the Court below stand confirmed.
7. The Civil Revision Petitions are partly allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.