Principle of deduction in land value for development does not arise.

AR. Lakshmanan, J.

The Land Acquisition Officer/ Sub Collector, Tindivanam, is the appellant herein. The above appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree in L.A.O.P. No.9 of 1983, dated 19. 1986 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Tindivanam.

2. At the instance of the 6th respondent certain pro-posals were made for acquisition of lands of an extent of 2.44 acres in R.S. No.236, etc., for the construction of Bus Depot to the 6th respondent/ Corporation. The Notification under Sec.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was published in Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 16. 1980 and the same was approved by the Government in G.O.Ms. No.623, Transport, dated 25. 1980. The draft declaration under Sec.6 of the Act and the draft direction under Sec.7 of the Act have been published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 17. 1981 and duly approved by the Government in G.O.Ms. No.726, Transport, dated 27. 1981. The award enquiry under Sec.11 of the Act was conducted by the Land Acquisition Officer at Tindivanam on 212. 1981 and 11. 1982. After due publication and service of the notices under Secs.9(1) and 10 of the Act and under Secs.9(3) and 10 of the Act, after giving sufficient time.

3. A total of 286 sales took place during the period in question. The lands which are covered by the sales and situated in a far off place to the proposed lands under acquisition, the items of sales covered by structures, etc., the items of sales including land and building, the sales covered by wet and dry lands, the lands covered by sales differ in sort, soil and taram to the land under acquisition, the sales relating to the land situate in thickly populated and already developed residential area, the lands adjoining the road frontage, sales in respect of Serial No.203, which is classified as street poromboke, the sales of lands which are not in the vicinity of the lands acquired and the lands classified as Railway Poromboke, have not been taken for consideration for fixing the compensation. Thus, 284 sales of lands have not been taken for consideration out of 286 items. Out of the remaining two items, the sale in Serial No. 186 relates to the sale of 0.01 l/4cents out of 16 cents in R.S. No.239/5, which is vacant house site and the same was sold for Rs.750. But, the Sub Registrar valued the sale at Rs.990 as the market value. Since the sale amount and the market value differs in this sale, this item has not been taken into consideration by the appellant/ Land Acquisition Officer. The only remaining item left is Serial No. 185, in which an extent 9 cents were sold for Rs.7,900 in R.S. Nos.239/13 and 239/14. This works out to Rs.87,778 per acre.

.4. According to the appellant, the data field is similar in all respects to that of the acquired lands. This sale is reasonable and reflects the present market value of the acquired lands. As such, the value for the acquired lands is fixed at Rs.87,778 per acre, which, according to the appellant, is reasonable.

5. The land in R.S. No.236 measuring 2.29 acres stands registered in the names of Kuppuswami Naidu and Ethirajulu Naidu in the village accounts in Holding No.737. The land owner who turned up for the enquiry claims higher compensation at the rate of Rs.4,000 per cent. The appellant fixed the value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.87,778 per acre and arrived at the total amount at Rs.2,01,060. The cost of the well, compound wall and other structures has been fixed at Rs.56,129 and the value of the trees at Rs.250. He also added 15% solatium, which comes to Rs.38,5745. In all, the total amount of compensation comes to Rs.2,95,7355. The amount payable to V.Kuppuswami Naidu after deducting the loan amount (principal and interest) payable to Susilabai Ammal was fixed at Rs.2,56,862.55 (Rs.2,95,737.55 minus Rs.38,875.00 = Rs.2,56,862.55). As the land owner has demanded enhanced compensation, a reference under Sec.18 of the Act was made to