In land acquisition matters, determination of fair market value must prioritize consistency with established judicial precedents for similar localities, and deductions for development charges should be uniform and restricted to standardized percentages to ensure equitable compensation.

JUDGMENT :

(Judgment of the Court was made by K.RAJASEKAR, J.)

The appeal has been filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation fixed by the Land Acquisition Tribunal/Subordinate Court, Krishnagiri in L.A.O.P.No.6 of 2010, dated 07.03.2017.

2.The appellant/claimant herein is the land owner situated in Survey Nos.132/1C, 140/2B, 141/5 to the total extent of 4.91 acres in Mornapalli Village, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District. The land of the appellant had been acquired by the Government of Tamil Nadu on the request made by SIPCOT for the development, creating an industrial complex. Originally, the Government of Tamil Nadu issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 under G.O.Ms.No.295, Industries, dated 17.08.2000. The notification was published in the Government Gazette on 06.09.2000 and in Newspapers on 25.08.2000 and 30.08.2000. The objections were conducted, notification was also issued and separate proceedings were initiated on 13.12.2000 under Section 5(A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Subsequently, Declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued on 26.07.2001. Gazette Notification and Paper Publications were effected on 22.08.2001 and 15.08.2001 respectively. Subsequently, the acquisition proceedings were proceeded under Tamil Nadu Act, 10/1999 (Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition Act for Industrial Sectors). Thereafter, the negotiations were taken place with the land owners on 30.08.2004, 31.08.2004, 03.09.2004, 06.09.2004 and 07.09.2004 however there was no consensus reached for fixing the compensation amount. Thereafter, the objections were called for fixing the award amount by making Paper Publication on 21.01.2005 both in English and Tamil dailies. Thereafter, the lands were handed over to the Requisitioning Body. Consequently, Enquiry was conducted and Award No.4 of 2007 dated 29.03.2007 was passed. In the award, the value of the lands were fixed as Rs.50,000/- per acre, 30% Solatium and compound value @ 12% was also granted. The compensation under other heads including solatium was also granted in the award.

3.Aggrieved over the fixation of compensation, the claimant sought reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Based on the reference, the Land Acquisition Tribunal/ Sub Court, Krishnagiri has enquired three Claim Petitions in the Common enquiry, such as L.A.O.P.Nos.4 of 2010, 5 of 2010 and 6 of 2010.

4.The Land Acquisition Tribunal after hearing the parties by following previous judgements of this Court has fixed Rs.8/- lakhs per acre for awarding compensation and also awarded other eligible heads. Claim Petitioner in L.A.O.P.No.6 of 2010/ the land owner filed this appeal challenging the quantum of compensation fixed for enhancement.

5.The learned counsel for the Appellant/Claim petitioner submitted that the compensation was fixed during the year 2007, and based on the steps taken by the claimant by filing Writ Petition for seeking reference in W.P.No.3426 of 2010 vide order dated 25.03.2010, only thereafter, the reference was considered by the Tribunal. The compensation was fixed after rejecting the exhibits of the appellant, is not proper and there is no contra evidence to reject the exhibits produced by the claimant to decide the market value of the lands acquired. He further submitted that certain deductions including the development charges awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side a