2008 Supreme(Mad) 1124
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAVRIAJA PANDIAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.P.S. JANARTHANA RAJA
The Special Tahsildar (LA)
Versus
Venugopal Pillai (Died) Kuppanna
Appeal Suits Nos.303 to 309 of 2004, 406 to 421 of 2004
Decided on : 01-04-2008
For the Petitioner: V. Ravi, Special Gov. Pleader.
For the Respondent:G. Jermiah, A.R. Suresh, A. Palaniappan, Advocates.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the determination of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 should consider the nature of the acquired lands, surrounding developments, and potential value of the land, and the calculation of additional amount, solatium, and interest should adhere to the statutory provisions.
Headnote:
Land Acquisition - Compensation - Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 17, Section 4(1), Section 6, Section 9(1), Section 9(3), Section 10(1), Section 18, Section 23 - The judgment discusses the determination of compensation for acquired lands, the application of development charges, and the calculation of additional amount, solatium, and interest under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Fact of the Case:
An extent of land was acquired for construction purposes under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The claimants contested the compensation determined by the Land Acquisition Officer, leading to a reference to the Court of Subordinate Judge, Tiruvallur. The Reference Court determined the compensation based on sale deeds and other factors, which was challenged by the Land Acquisition Officer.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the determination of compensation by the Reference Court was justifiable, considering the nature of the acquired lands and the surrounding developments. The Court modified the additional amount granted by the Reference Court and confirmed the solatium and interest on solatium.
Issues: The issues revolved around the determination of compensation, application of development charges, and calculation of additional amount, solatium, and interest under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the determination of compensation should consider the nature of the acquired lands, the surrounding developments, and the potential value of the land. It also clarified the calculation of additional amount, solatium, and interest under the Act.
Final Decision: The appeals were disposed of with the modification of the additional amount granted by the Reference Court and confirmation of the solatium and interest on solatium.
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.
An extent of 28.34 acres in block No.II and 29.85½ acres in block No.III in various survey numbers, (totalling to 115 survey numbers and part thereof) situated in No.56, Perumbakkam village, Tiruvallur Taluk and District have been acquired for the purpose of construction of office building, staff quarters under Master Plan complex in Tiruvallur District headquarters under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 by invoking the urgency clause under section 17 of the Act. Section 4(1) notification was published in the Tamilnadu Government gazette on 12.06.1998 and published in the local dailies on 18.06.1998. The substance of the notice was published in the locality on 22.06.1998. The draft declaration under section 6 of the Act was approved and published on 23.06.1998. Possession was also taken on 212. 1998 and 80% of the compensation was paid. After issuance of notice under section 9(1) and 10(1) and individual notice under section 9(3) of the Act, the appellant, the Land Acquisition Officer, passed awards in Award Nos.1 and 2/1999 dated 28.06.1999. While passing awards 94 sales statistics which took place from 22.06.1995 to 22.06.1998 were collected. The Land Acquisition Officer has taken items Nos.33, 34 and 35, sale deeds which relate to survey Nos.106/5, etc., 111/1 etc., and 107/1 etc., as data sale deeds and determined the compensation at Rs.417/- per cent, (i.e., at Rs.41,700/- per acre) for wet land and 2/3rd of the amount Rs.278/- per cent for dry land as reflecting the true and correct market value. The Land Acquisition Officer granted statutory solatium, additional market value and interest. The other sale deeds were discarded for the reason that some of them pertain to poromboke land; some of them relate to house sites; some of them relate to meagre extent of land sold for higher value; some of them situated far away from the acquired land; some of them were combined sale of plot and building; and some of them were low lying land of lesser value.
2. The claimants/owners of the land received 80% of the compensation on protest and sought for reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. Pursuant to the same the Land Acquisition Officer referred the matter to the Court of Subordinate Judge, Tiruvallur.
3. Before the Reference Court, the claimants claimed Rs.50,000/- per cent by contending that the compensation determined by the Land Acquisition Officer was far below the market rate in the vicinity on the date of the 4(1) notification. The officer has not followed the provisions of section 23 of the Act for the determination of the compensation. There is no discussion as to how he determined the compensation. The Land Acquisition Officer has not applied either the capitalisation method or obtained any expert opinion to find out the real market value, or the comparable sale method valuation.
4. It was further contended that the acquired lands were classified as land situated in urban areas and situated on the southern side of the Highway Road from Chennai to Tirupathi. The district headquarters is in a walkable distance. There are nationalised banks, schools, hospitals, bazars, market within the distance of one km. The railway station is situated 2 kms away from the acquired land. There are number of housing layouts and colonies formed in and around the acquired land. The multi national companies like Caterpillar, Lancer company, Hyundai car company are nearer to the acquired land. There are many Engineering and Arts colleges situated near the land.
5. The claimants marked as many as 18 sale deeds before the Reference Court to sustain their claims. The reference Court has taken into consideration the sale deed Ex.C1 dated 21.08.1996 which was in respect of the land in survey No.17/1 Perumbakkam village sold at Rs.13,085/- per cent. Having regard to the lye of the land and the fact that the land under Ex.C1 is situated on the northern side of the Chennai – Tirupathi high