The main legal point established in the judgment is that the assessment of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act should be based on evidence such as sale deeds and property location, and should not be used as a means to delay payment.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: This Appeal Suit is filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, against the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Madurai in L.A.O.P.No.139 of 1995 dated 17.04.1998.)

1. Aggrieved over the order of the Tribunal enhancing the compensation from Rs.400/- per cent to Rs.2,500/- per cent, the present appeal suit came to be filed.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to herein, as per their rank before the Trial Court.

3. The brief facts, leading to the filing of this Appeal Suit, are as follows:-

The claimant is the owner of 2½ cents in Survey No.65/2C2 in Thoppur Village, Madurai. The said land was acquired for the purpose of Tamil Nadu Housing Board under the notification dated 20.12.1991. The Land Acquisition Officer has fixed the compensation at the rate of Rs.400/- per cent. Aggrieved over the same, the matter has been referred to the Land Acquisition Tribunal. The Land Acquisition Tribunal, after considering the materials, has enhanced the compensation at the rate of Rs.2,500/- per cent with 30% solatium, which totally comes to Rs.8,027/- with interest at the rate of 12%. Challenging same, the present appeal is filed.

4. When the matter was referred to the Tribunal, on the side of the claimant, P.W.1 was examined and Exs.B1 and B2 were marked and on the side of the respondent, R.W.1 was examined and Ex.R1 was marked.

5. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the appellant submitted that the tribunal has enhanced the compensation without any evidence and the same requires re-consideration by this Court.

6. From the above pleadings, now the point arises for consideration is Whether the compensation fixed by the Tribunal is arbitrary and without any evidence?

7. Heard the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the appellant and perused the materials placed on record.

8. The Tribunal, after considering Ex.B1, sale deed dated 10.05.1989, which was prior to the notification dated 20.12.1991, has found that in the same area, 5 1/2 cents were sold for a sum of Rs.14,850/-, which means the value of one cent in that area is Rs.2,700/-. Similarly, Ex.B2, sale deed, also shows that the property in the same area was sold for a sum of Rs.7,200/-.

9. From the above facts, it is clear that the Tribunal had not only considered the documents, but also the evidence of R.W.1 and the location of the property. The disputed land is situated nearby a highway and in a developing area. Nearby places are well developed and dwelling houses are also constructed. After considering all these evidence, the Tribunal has enhanced the compensation from Rs.400/- per cent to Rs.2,500/- per cent.

10. On perusal of the entire evidence, particularly Exs.B1 and B2 and the evidence of R.W.1, this Court is of the view that the Tribunal has correctly assessed the documents and enhanced the compensation. After all an extent of 2 1/2 cents was acquired from the claimant and the compensation per cent comes around only Rs.2,500/- per cent. Instead of paying the said reasonable compensation, the present appeal is filed only to delay the payment. Such view of the matter, this Court does not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the point arose for consideration in this appeal is answered.

11. In the result, this appeal is dismissed and the judgment and decree made in L.A.O.P.No.139 of 1995, dated 17.04.1998 is hereby confirmed. No costs.