Valuation enhanced by reference court reduced in appeal.

A.S.VENKATACHALAMOORTHY, J

The above appeal has been preferred by the State of Tamilnadu represented by the Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Nagercoil, being aggrieved by the decree and judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge, Padmanabhapuram dated 28.8.1990 in L.A.O.P.No.11 of 1985, fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.1,000/- percent.

2. An extent of 1.96 acre comprised in survey No.590/4 in Athur village, Kalkulam Taluk was acquired by the State for providing house sites for Adi Dravidas. The notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 7.8.1984. The award enquiry was conducted by the Land Acquisition Officer in compliance with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act and all persons interested, participated in that enquiry. The said Officer, on the basis of the materials available before him, came to the conclusion that the market value of the land can be fixed at Rs.200/- per cent. The land owners, being aggrieved by such fixation, sought for reference to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.

3. The reference was taken on file by the learned Subordinate Judge, Padmanabhapuram as L.A.O.P.11 of 1985. Before the reference Court, the 4th Claimant by name Antony T.Moreas was examined to substantiate the case of the land owners. Documentary evidence Exs.A-1 to A-5 were also filed before the Court. On the side of the revenue, the Land Acquisition Officer by name Gnanaprakasam was examined and two documents including a sale deed of the year 1983 were marked.

4. Before the reference Court, the Claimants filed I.A.100 of 1987 in L.A.O.P.11 of 1985 under Order 26 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying the Court to appoint an Advocate-Commissioner to ascertain the value of the property by local investigation. The reference Court, by its order dated 22.4.1987, appointed one Jayakumaran Thampi as Commissioner to assess the value of the property as on the date of Section 4(1) notification. The report filed by the said Commissioner dated 30.10.1987 has also been exhibited before the reference Court. The reference Court, after considering the oral and documentary evidence, came to the conclusion that the market value of the property can be fixed at Rs.1,000/- per cent. The present appeal has been filed by the State represented by the Land Acquisition Officer, questioning the correctness of the same.

5. Mr.M.C.Swamy, Special Government Pleader contended before this Court that the reference Court fixed the market value of the land solely on the basis of the report of the Advocate-Commissioner when the said Commissioner filed the same not on the basis of any document and that being so, no reliance should have been placed on the said report. According to the learned counsel, the Commissioner should have placed all materials before the Court on the basis of which he has opined that the market value has to be fixed at the minimum of Rs.1,500/- per cent. Drawing the attention of this Court to Ex.B-2, the learned Special Government Pleader contended that under the said document an extent of 4½ cents comprised in R.S.NO.473 was sold for a sum of Rs.900/- and that the said survey number is two survey numbers away from the acquired lands and that both the lands are similar and similarly placed. That being so, the Court should have adopted the value as reflected under Ex.B-2 and fixed the market value at Rs.200/- per cent.

6. Mr.T.R.Rajaraman, learned counsel appearing for the land owners would contend that the data land is situated far away from the acquired land and that being so, the sale transaction under Ex.B-2 cannot be taken into consideration. That apart, it is also contended, while the acquired land abuts the road, the data land is interior and that apart, nearby the acquired lands, there are important land marks such as Church, School, Shops, etc., and that the acquired lands are superior in every respect.

With regard to the Commissioner's report, the