Madras High Court
Baskara Nadar (Died) vs The Special Thasildar on 24 February, 2021
A.S.(MD)No.181 of 2006
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 24.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
A.S.(MD)No.181 of 2006
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.1828 of 2021
1.Baskara Nadar (died)
2.Rajasekar Nadar (died)
3.J.Prakasavathy
4.J.Shreedharan
5.Vanitha
6.S.M.D.Kasiammal(died)
7.S.M.D.Raghavan
8.B.Vijayalakshmi
9.S.Vijayakumar
10.S.M.D.Mahadevan
11.B.Nagakumari
12.S.M.D.Kesavan
13.M.Meenakshi
14.S.M.D.Chandra Mohan (died)
15.B.Srirangam
16.R.Vijayarathinam
17.V.Jansirani
18.B.Krishnamoorthy
19.S.M.R.Prabarathy
20.M.R.Manickavel
21.Sailaja Mohan
22.Dhanuskodi
23.Minor Priyadharshini ..Appellants/Referring Officer
(Appellants 15 - 18 were brought on record as legal heirs of the deceased 18th appellant
Appellants 19 & 20 were brought on record as legal heirs of the deceased 2nd appellant
Appellants 21 -23 were brought on record as legal heirs of the deceased
Vs.
The Special Thasildar,
(Land Acquisition),
Adi Dravidar Welfare,
Virudhunagar. ...Respondent/Referring Officer
1/7
http://www.judis.nic.in
A.S.(MD)No.181 of 2006
PRAYER: This Appeal Suit is filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition
Act, against the order and decree in L.A.O.P.No.8 of 1996 dated 14.02.2005
on the file of the Sub Court, Virudhunagar.
For Appellants : Mr.A.Sivaji
For Respondent : Mr.J.Gunaseelan Muthiah
Additional Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved over the order of the Land Acquisition Tribunal fixing
the compensation only at the rate of Rs.55/- per cent, the present appeal
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:-
(i) An extent of 6.12 acres in Survey No.86/1, Bavali Village,
Virudhunagar District was acquired for the purpose of issuing house site
patta to the Adi Dravidar Community people under notification under
Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act dated 08.06.1988. The Land
Acquisition Officer fixed the compensation at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per acre
with 30% solatium and necessary interest as per law. The matter was
http://www.judis.nic.in
A.S.(MD)No.181 of 2006
referred to the Land Acquisition Tribunal for enhancement of compensation
under Section 18(1) of the Act.
(ii) Before the Tribunal, on the side of the claimant, C.W.1 was
examined and Exs.C1 and C2 were marked and on the side of the
respondent R.W.1 was examined and Ex.R1 to R4 were marked.
(ii) The Land Acquisition Tribunal, after considering the evidences
and materials placed before it, found that the sale deed relied upon by the
claimants are after the notification and fixed the compensation only at the
rate of Rs.55/- per cent. Challenging same, the present appeal is filed.
4. During the course of appeal, an application under Order 41 Rule
27 CPC r/w Section 151 CPC to receive document, namely the copy of the
judgment in L.A.O.P.No.341 of 1996 in respect of the acquisition
proceedings in the same village and for the same purpose as that of the
present case on hand by the same Court as an additional document with
delay and the delay was condoned by this Court. The said Land Acquisition
Original Petition was challenged in A.S.SR.No.23028 of 2005 before this
Court and the same was dismissed for default on 13.09.2013. In the said
judgment, the Land Acquisition Tribunal has fixed the compensation at the
rate of Rs.1,667/- per cent after deducting development charges and the
http://www.judis.nic.in
A.S.(MD)No.181 of 2006
matter attained reached finality. In order to prove the above said fact, the
additional document sought to be received.
5. There is no serious objection on the side of the respondent in
allowing the petition seeking to receive an additional document, since the
subject matter in that document is one and the same. Further, both sides
concede that copy of the order alone can be brought on record and no
rebuttal or oral evidence is required in this matter This Court is also of the
view that the additional document has to be brought on record to enable
this Court to arrive at a reasonable conclusion. Hence, the application is
allowed and the judgement in L.A.O.P.No.341 of 1996 is marked as Ex.C3.
6. In view of the above submission, now the points arise for
consideration in this appeal are:-
(1) Whether the Land Acquisition Tribunal has considered
the materials properly and passed the order?
(2) Whether the claimants are entitled to enhancement of
compensation?
7. Admittedly, the subject property in the present case in Bawali
Village in survey No.86/1 and the subject property in L.A.O.P.No.341 of
1996 in Survey No.131/2 in the same village were acquired for the purpose
http://www.judis.nic.in
A.S.(MD)No.181 of 2006
of issuing house site patta to the Adi Dravidar community people under
different notifications dated 10.06.1988 and 14.07.1993. This fact was not
disputed by either side.
8. The Land Acquisition Tribunal passed an award fixing the
compensation at the rate of Rs.55/- per cent in respect of Survey No.86/1
and rejected the documents filed by the claimants under Exs.C1 and C2,
dated 12.06.1991 and 19.08.1991, respectively on the ground that those
documents came into existence only after the notification. However, the
Land Acquisition Tribunal has relied upon the above said documents in
L.A.O.P.No.341 of 1996 and arrived at the compensation at the rate
Rs.1,667/- after deducting 33% development charges. This is also admitted
by both sides. Further, as against the enhancement of compensation in
L.A.O.P.No.341 of 1996 an appeal also filed in A.S.SR.No.23028 of 2005 and
the same was dismissed for default. No appeal has been filed as against the
same. Such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that since the lands
were acquired for the same purpose in the same village, to maintain the
uniformity in awarding compensation, the compensation fixed and reached
finality in L.A.O.P.No.341 of 1996 ought to be given to the claimants in the
present case also. Therefore, this Court in order to adopt uniformity and
avoid indiscrimination among the claimants, fixes the compensation at the
rate of Rs.1,667/- per cent in the present case also. This amount is arrived
http://www.judis.nic.in
A.S.(MD)No.181 of 2006
after deducting the development charges as held in other matter. In respect
of other aspects i.e., solatium and interest, the order of the Tribunal is
hereby confirmed. The Land Acquisition Officer is directed to pay the
enhanced amount with interest at the rate, as stated above. The appellants
are directed to pay the additional Court fee, if any.
9. In the result, this Appeal Suit is allowed. No costs.
24.02.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
ta
To
1.The Sub Court, Virudhunagar
2.The Section Officer,
Vernacular Records,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
http://www.judis.nic.in
A.S.(MD)No.181 of 2006
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.
ta
Judgment made in
A.S.(MD)No.181 of 2006
24.02.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
