BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 30/04/2009
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.RAMANATHAN
A.S.No.783 of 1997
The Special Tahsildar(L.A),
Aruppukottai. ... Appellant
Vs.
Irulappan Achary ... Respondent
Prayer
This Appeal has been filed under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act,
against the judgment and decree dated 23.06.1992 made in L.A.O.P.No.1 of 1988 on
the file of Sub Judge, Sivaganga.
!For Appellant ... Mr.S.C.Herold Singh
Addl. Government Pleader
^For Respondent ... Mr.S.Subbiah
:JUDGMENT
The Special Tahsildar (LA), Aruppukkotai, is the appellant herein.
2.Land in Survey No.75/4 of an extent of 1.19 acres and 73 Cents in
Survey No.75/11, in Valukkalotti village, Aruppukottai Taluk, was acquired under
4(1) notification dated 21.10.1985 and after complying with the legal
formalities the appellant considered 26 sale deeds and selected the land in
Survey Nos.75/4 & 75/11 as data land and fixed the market value at Rs.130/- per
Cent. Not being satisfied with the same, the claimant sought for reference
under 18 of the Act and reference was made in L.A.O.P.No.1 of 1988 on the file
of the Sub Court, Sivaganga and the learned Sub Judge enhanced the market value
to Rs.250/- per Cent. Aggrieved by the same, this appeal is filed by the
appellant.
3.Before the trial Court, the claimant examined himself as P.W.1 and on
the side of the appellant, the statement of the claimant and notice sent by the
District Collect, Virudhu Nagar, was marked as Exs.R1 and R2.
4.Mr.S.C.Herold Singh, the learned Additional Government Pleader,
appearing for the appellant vehemently contended that the learned Sub Judge
without any basis arbitrarily enhanced the market value from Rs.130/- to
Rs.250/-per Cent and therefore, it has to be reduced.
5.The point for determination in this appeal is whether the enhancement of
market value by the lower Court is justified or not?
6.The acquired land is in Survey Nos.75/4 and 11. It is seen from the
award proceedings that the land in Survey No.75/4 of an extent of 40 Cents was
sold at the rate of Rs.250/- per Cent in the year 1985 and that was rejected by
the appellant on the ground that higher market value has been stated in that
sale deed. It has been held by our Honourable Supreme Court in 2002 Vol.10 SCC
570 in the case of Land Acquisition Officer (Revenue Divisional Officer),
Nalgonda (A.P) vs. Morisetty Satyanarayana and Others and in 2005(12) SCC 59 in
the case of Ranvir Singh and another vs. Union of India the sale deed in respect
of the same survey number of the acquired land shall be preferred to other
evidence and in this case, if we apply that principle, land in Survey No.75/4,
which is a part of the acquired land was sold at the rate of Rs.250/- per Cent
and therefore, the market value fixed by the lower Court is correct, even though
the learned Sub Judge did not give any reason for fixing the market value at
Rs.250/- per Cent. As I fixed the market value on the basis of the sale deed in
respect of the same survey number, the market value can be fixed at Rs.250/- per
Cent and therefore, there is no reason to interfere with the fixation of
compensation by the lower Court.
7.In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the decree and judgment of
the lower Court is confirmed. There is no order as to costs.
er
To,
The Sub Judge,
Sivaganga.