The Special Tahsildar(La) vs S.Alagarsamy
2021 Latest Caselaw 1927 Mad

                                                                                A.S.(MD)No.114 of 2017

                          BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                DATED : 29.01.2021

                                                     CORAM:

                            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

                                               A.S.(MD)No.114 of 2017
                                                       and
                                              M.P.(MD).No.6580 of 2017

                 The Special Tahsildar(LA),
                 South Neighbourhood Scheme,
                 Unit-3,
                 Madurai.                                      ... Appellant/Referring Officer


                                                       Vs.
                 1.S.Alagarsamy                                ... Respondent No.1/claimant

                 2.The Executive Engineer and
                 Administrative Officer,
                 Tamil Nadu Housing Board,
                 Madurai.                                     .. 2nd Respondent/Beneficiary




                 PRAYER: Appeal Suit filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act against
                 the judgment and decree of the learned I-Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai
                 in L.A.O.P.No.82 of 1995 and 29th day of September, 2000.




                 1/6
http://www.judis.nic.in
                                                                                      A.S.(MD)No.114 of 2017

                                    For Appellant              : Mr.J.Gunaseelan Muthaiah
                                                                 Additional Government Pleader

                                    For Respondent No.1          : Mr.G.Aravinthan
                                                               for M/s.S.Balasubramanian

                                    For Respondent No.2          : Mr.R.Janarthanan


                                                   JUDGMENT

Aggrieved over the order of the Land Acquisition Tribunal, enhancing

the compensation from Rs.100/- per cent to Rs.1,700/-per cent, the present Appeal

Suit has been filed by the State Government.

2. The brief facts, leading to file the appeal suit, is as follows:

The land to an extent of 0.05.5 hectares in S.No.75/10, situated at

Uchapatti Village, Thirumangalam Taluk, Madurai was owned by the claimant. In

the said land 5/6 share was acquired on 17.03.1995 after issuing notification under

Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, dated 28.07.1994, by the Tamilnadu

Housing Board. The Land Acquisition Officer has fixed the compensation at Rs.

100/- per cent, whereas the Tribunal has enhanced the compensation from Rs.100/-

per cent to Rs.1,700/- per cent. Challenging the same, the present appeal suit has

been filed.

http://www.judis.nic.in A.S.(MD)No.114 of 2017

3. Before the Tribunal, on the side of the claimant, C.W.1 was examined

and Exs.C1 to C3 were marked. No oral and documentary evidences were adduced

on the side of the respondents. The Tribunal considering the documents marked

under Exs.C1 and C2, ie., per cent has been sold for Rs.1,700/- as per Ex.C1,

dated 10.03.1996 and per cent has been sold for Rs.3,500/- as per Ex.C2, dated

20.04.1990 has passed the order of enhancement.

4. The Tribunal has considered the entire materials produced before it

and factually found that the acquired land is situated within the reachable distance

to the Danapandian Polytechnic, SIDCO Industrial Estate, Seethalakshmi Mill and

so many residential plots and schools and companies and it has also taken note of

the fact that the acquired land is also situated near the Madurai-Kanniyakumari

National Highway and fixed the compensation at Rs.1,700/- per cent.

5. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of

the appellant would submit that the Tribunal has considered Exs.C1 and C2

documentary evidence alone and compensation enhanced by the Tribunal is

against the law. Therefore, the enhancement made by the Tribunal is not based on

evidence and hence, prays for allowing the appeal suit.

http://www.judis.nic.in A.S.(MD)No.114 of 2017

6. Now the point arisen for consideration is;

“Whether the enhancement of compensation fixed by the tribunal is

without any basis?”

7. Heard the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf

of the appellant and the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents

and perused the entire materials available on record.

8. On perusal of the entire materials, it reveals that the Tribunal has also

considered the location of the property and nature of the development took place

in the nearby properties and enhanced the compensation to Rs.1700/- per cent and

Ex.C2 in fact shows that the land has been sold for higher value in the year 1989

itself. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the order of the Tribunal is well

reasonable and based on the factual aspects. Accordingly, this Court does not find

any infirmity or error in the order. Accordingly, the point for consideration is

answered.

http://www.judis.nic.in A.S.(MD)No.114 of 2017

9. In the result, the Appeal Suit is dismissed. No costs. Consequently,

connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

29.01.2021

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No

PJL

Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

To

1.The Subordinate Judge, Madurai.

2.The Section Officer, Vernacular Records, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

http://www.judis.nic.in A.S.(MD)No.114 of 2017

N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.

PJL

A.S.(MD)No.114 of 2017

29.01.2021

http://www.judis.nic.in