V. Ramasubramanian, J.

1. This appeal filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, arises out of an award passed by the Land Acquisition Tribunal, enhancing the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. We have heard Mr. P. Gunasekaran, learned Additional Government Pleader (Appeals) and Mr. G. Rajan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2.

2. In order to widen and strengthen the existing State Highways Roads and for forming new bypass roads in the important towns in Tamil Nadu, the Government issued G.O. Ms. No. 174, Highways dated 25.9.2001 authorising the District Collectors to acquire lands through private negotiations. In Tiruvannamalai District, about 47 villages located in 4 taluks were chosen for widening of roads and 18 villages in 3 taluks were chosen for forming new bypass.

3. In Tiruvannamalai Taluk itself, the lands located in 8 villages were chosen for acquisition for the purpose of forming bypass. One such village was Nochimalai village. In the said village, the lands chosen for acquisition were located in 24 sub-divisions. Out of them, the lands located in 22 sub-divisions were acquired through private negotiations. Since the land owners of the remaining two sub-divisions did not accept the valuation fixed by the Collector under G.O. Ms. No. 40, Highways dated 25.2.2003 during the private negotiations held on 14.3.2005, the Government decided to acquire the lands of those two persons under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001.

4. Thereafter, notice under Section 15(2) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001 in Form-A was served on the two land owners namely N. Ponnusamy and P. Amsaveni, who are the respondents herein, on 18.8.2008. The notice was also published in the newspapers on 22.9.2008. Thereafter, the Government issued orders in G.O. Ms. No. 57, Highways dated 3.4.2009 and the same was published in the Government Gazette on 22.4.2009.

5. The District Collector thereafter passed an award in Award No. 10 of 2009 dated 19.5.2009, fixing the market value of the land as Rs. 25.75 per sq.ft.

6. Aggrieved by the said award, the respondents-land owners sought a reference. The reference was taken on file as L.A.O.P. No. 1 of 2009. By an Award dated 9.11.2009, the Tribunal enhanced the compensation to Rs. 100/- per sq. ft. In addition, the Tribunal also awarded compensation for severance, compensation for re-settlement and rehabilitation and compensation for certain constructions, certain trees and fencing.

7. Eventually, the total compensation of Rs. 6,25,716/- awarded by the Acquisition Officer was enhanced by the Tribunal to Rs. 95,83,662/-. Hence, this appeal.

8. Before we get into details, we are obliged to bring on record one important development that had taken place after the Tribunal passed an award on 9.11.2009. It appears that after the Tribunal passed an award on 9.11.2009 in L.A.O.P. No. 1 of 2009, the second respondent herein filed an application in I.A. No. 1 of 2010 for a review of the award, on the ground that the trees, overhead water tank and barbed wire fencing have not been properly valued. This review was entertained by the Tribunal in terms of Section 114 read with Order XLVII, Rule 1 CPC and by an order dated 3.2.2010, the Tribunal allowed the review application and enhanced the compensation further to Rs. 1,25,73,662/-.

9. However, without reference to the order passed on the review application on 3.2.2010, the Land Acquisition Officer filed the above appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, somewhere in August, 2011, along with an application for the condonation of the delay. The delay was condoned and the appeal was numbered and it came up for hearing after 4 years. It was only when the appeal was taken up for final hearing, that it came to light that the award was modified on an application for review.

Preliminary iss