The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of just and proper compensation under Section 23 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, considering various sale transactions and statutory amounts payable to the claimants.

P. Sathasivam, J.

1. Claimants in L.A.O.P.Nos. 1 of 1991 and 2 of 1991 are the appellants in the above appeals. An extent of 2.53.5 hectares (6.25 Acres) of dry lands in Survey Nos.17,18 and 19 in A. Jettihalli Village, Dharmapuri Taluk were acquired by the Government for construction of building shed for Annai Sathya Transport Corporation. Notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") has been published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 2.7.86. The Land Acquisition Officer passed an Award on 1.12.1988 fixing compensation at the rate of Rs.26,490 per acre. Not satisfied with the amount fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer, at the instance of the landowners, the matter was referred to the Sub Court, Dharmapuri under section 18 of the Act, which resulted in L.A.O.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 1991. Before the Sub Court, the claimants have prayed for compensation at the rate of Rs.20 per sq.ft. On the side of the claimants, the claimant in L.A.O.P.No. 1 of 1991 was examined as C.W.1 and one Nachimuthu, Sub Registrar of Dharmapuri West was examined as C.W.2. Various sale-deeds were marked as Exs. A-1 to A-6 in support of their claim. On the side of the Referring Officer, two witnesses were examined as R.Ws.1 and 2 and Exs. B-1 to B-7 marked in support of their stand. The learned Subordinate Judge after considering all the materials and in the absence of any acceptable evidence for enhancement, confirmed the amount fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer and dismissed both the petitions, hence the present appeals by the claimants.

2. Heard the learned senior counsel for the appellants and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the first respondent.

3. Mr. N.R. Chandran, learned senior counsel for the appellants, after taking us through award proceedings of the Land Acquisition Officer, the evidence let in before the Sub Court as well as the impugned order of the learned Subordinate Judge, would contend that the Court below committed an error in rejecting all sale transactions under Exs. A-1 to A-6. He also contended that the learned Subordinate Judge failed to see the future potential value and the existence of important buildings such as Collector's office. Office of the Superintendent of Police, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board etc. He also contended that the Court below erred in relying upon Ex.B-1 as data land which is situated in Survey No. 115/1 and far away from the acquired lands in Survey Nos. 17 and 18. He further contended that the Court below ought to have accepted the guideline value of the land and the evidence of C.W.2 Sub Registrar. He further contended that the Court below failed to see Ex.B-5 report, wherein the Tahsildar, Dharmapuri clearly pointed out that the compensation for the acquired lands can be awarded at Rs.1,25,000. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Pleader would contend that in the absence of any acceptable legal evidence on the side of the claimants, the learned Subordinate Judge was right in dismissing their claim petitions.

4. Wehave carefully considered the rival submissions.

5. Theonly point for consideration in both the appeals is whether the claimants are entitled higher compensation as claimed; and the learned Subordinate Judge is justified in dismissing their claim petitions.

6. Before the Court below, the claimant in L.A.O.P.No.1 of 1991 was examined as C.W.1. No doubt, she has explained the potential value and the existence of important buildings, offices near the acquired lands. Her evidence can be considered in addition to the documentary evidence, namely, sale transactions that had taken place 3 years prior to the 4 (1) notification. The claimants have produced and marked certified copy of various sale-deeds as Exs. A-1 to A-6. Under Ex.A-1 dated 2.2.84, an extent of 1806 sq.ft. of land in A.Jettihalli village had been sold for Rs.7,200. Under Ex.A-2 dated 19.8.85, an extent of 2180 sq.ft. had been sol