The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to adhere to objective standards in enhancing compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, considering the purpose of land acquisition and relevant sales statistics.

This appeal by the Land Acquisition Officer is focussed as against the judgment and decree dated 111. 1998 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Vellore in LAOP No.36 of 1997. For convenience sake, the parties are referred to here under according to their litigative status before the trial Court.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

.3. The nutshell facts which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this appeal would run thus:

.The Government effected publication under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act for acquiring the lands measuring an extent of 12. 5 hectares in S.No.329/2B in D.P.Palayam Village, Gudiyatham Taluk for the purpose of providing land to Adi Dravidar community people. After complying with the procedures, the Land Acquisition Officer acquired the land and assessed the compensation in a sum of Rs.300/- per cent. Being aggrieved by such awarding of the compensation, the land owners got the matter referred to the Sub Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.

4. During enquiry before the Sub Court, on the side of the claimant, C.W.1 and C.w.2 were examined and Exs.A1 and A2 were marked. On the side of the respondent, Exs.B1 and B2 were marked.

5. Ultimately, the Sub Court enhanced the compensation to the tune of Rs.250/-per cent.

6. Being dissatisfied with such enhancement, the Land Acquisition Officer preferred this appeal on various grounds, the gist and kernel of them would run thus:

7. The point for consideration is as to whether the Reference Court enhanced the compensation without adhering to objective standard.

8. The learned Additional Government Pleader (A.S.) placing reliance on the grounds of appeal would develop his argument to the effect that without any objective basis, the compensation in a sum of Rs.250/-was fixed per cent; over and above, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-was awarded towards acquisition of the well and for trees also, the compensation was enhanced without any valid reason, whereas the learned counsel for the land owners would submit that item 23 of the sales statistics would highlight that one cent of land was sold for a sum of Rs.1,666/-and in such a case, if that standard is applied, the compensation awarded by the Reference Court would be very low and accordingly, he prays that there need not be any interference with the lower Courts order. He would also submit that for the well, the trial Court ordered a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, which also could be left uninterfered with.

9. A perusal of the judgment of the trial Court would demonstrate that the trial Court after discussing the facts concerned, simply fixed the compensation in a sum of Rs.250/- per cent of land without referring to any item of sale in the sales statistics Ex.B2 or any other document.

10. The learned counsel for the land owner would submit that even though the Reference Court might not have stated reasons, this Court could consider the fact that the land acquired is for allotting house sites to the Adi Dravidar community people and it is in a developing area.

11. A perusal of the sales statistics as gathered by the Land Acquisition Officer would reveal that the item 2 therein is relating to a punja land measuring an extent of 17 cents which was sold for a sum of Rs.4,000/-on 21.02.1991 so to say a few months anterior to Section 4(1) Notification dated 112. 1991. Accordingly if worked out, the said lands have been sold at the rate of Rs.235/-per cent, whereas the Reference Court fixed the compensation in a sum of Rs.250/- per cent.

.12. The other items of sale as found in Ex.B1 are all not capable of being equated with the land acquired and it is quite obvious from the perusal of it. Neither the learned counsel for the land owners nor the learned Additional Government Pleader could pin point out as to any other item in Ex.B1 could be relied upon as a safe guide for assessing the compensation. In fact, item 23 relied on by the land owners is referr