ORDER :

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to set aside the judgment and decree dated 02.02.2021 passed in I.A.SR.No.363 of 05.01.2021 in L.A.O.P.No.12 of 2005 on the file of the II Additional Subordinate Court, Tiruchirappalli.

The Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order passed in I.A.SR.No.363 of 05.01.2021 in L.A.O.P.No.12 of 2005, dated 02.02.2021, on the file of the IInd Additional Subordinate Court, Tiruchirappalli, dismissing the petition filed under Sections 151, 152 and 153 of Code of Civil Procedure.

2. The revision petitioner is the petitioner/claimant. The facts not in dispute are :

(i) An extent of 59.026 square feet of land situated in Sengulam, Tiruchirappalli was acquired for construction of Railway over Bridge, vide notification, dated 30.07.2002.

(ii) The respondent acquired an extent of 479 square feet land belonging to the petitioner. The respondent has passed an award by fixing the compensation at Rs.303/- per sq.feet. Not satisfying with the quantum of compensation, the petitioner has raised objections. Hence, the same were referred to the Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.

3.The learned Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirappalli, had taken up the batch of 16 Land Acquisition Original Petitions. After full pledged trial, the learned Subordinate Judge has passed common order, dated 23.12.2016, fixing the compensation at the rate of Rs.685/- per sq.feet instead of Rs.303/- per sq.feet. The revision petitioner is the claimant in LAOP.No.12 of 2005 and as per the common order, dated 23.12.2016, decree was granted in his favour, fixing the compensation at Rs.685/- per sq.feet instead of Rs.303/- per sq.feet.

4. Admittedly, there is no appeal either by the claimants including the revision petitioner or by the respondent. After 4 years from the date of common order passed in batch of LAOPs, the revision petitioner has filed an application in I.A.SR.No.363 of 05.01.2021, under Sections 151, 152 and 153 CPC, for amending the decree and judgment in accordance with Section 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

5. The petitioner's case is that while drafting the decree, dated 23.12.2016, the following statutory amounts were omitted to be incorporated in the decree;

(i) The statutory additional market value of the land at 12% from the date of publication i.e., on 30.07.2002 to date of award i.e. upto 27.01.2004 has to be awarded under Section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act.

(ii) In addition to the market value of the land, 30% solatium on such market value has to be awarded, under Section 23(2) of the said Act.

(iii) Under Section 28 of the said Act, interest on the market value from the date of taking possession on 30.05.2003 till the date of award on 27.01.2004 has to be awarded at 9 % per annum besides interest at 9% from 28.01.2004 to 23.12.2016 till the date of decree.

(iv) In case, if the Government fails to pay decree amount, even after year (24.12.2016 to 23.12.2017), interest at 15% per annum must be paid after such date till realization.

6. It is further case of the petitioner that they came to know about the defects only when the execution petition was returned and that therefore, the petitioner was constrained to file the above application to amend the decree and judgment suitably, otherwise the petitioner will be put to huge monetary loss, due to forcible acquisition of his property by the Government.

7.The learned II Additional Sub Judge, without taking the petition on file, after hearing the arguments of the petitioner's side, has passed the impugned order on 02.02.2021, dismissing the petition. Aggrieved by the said dismissal order, the claimant has come forward with the present revision.

8. The learned Additional Government Pleader would submit that the petitioner ought to have filed an appeal challenging the order passed in LAOP and the amendment petition is legally not maintainable.

9. At the out set, it is necessary to ref