IYASAMY Vs. SPL TAHSILDAR LAND ACQUISITION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these appeals are arising out of the land acquisition proceeding in which various notifications under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") were issued in proximity of time, i.e. in 1981, with respect to adjoining lands in the Erode and Periasemur Villages for the construction of houses for the scheme called "Erode West Neighbourhood Scheme" and therefore we propose to decide them by a common judgment and order. The Civil Appeal Nos. 1760-1761 are directed against final judgment and order dated 18-01-2001 passed by the Madras High Court in Appeal No. 298/92 and CMP No. 15057/97 wherein the High Court by its impugned judgment partly allowed the appeal filed by the Respondent and declined to condone the delay of 7 days in filing the Cross appeal by the appellants and consequently, dismissed the CMP No. 15057/97. Consequent thereto, the cross-appeal of the Appellants was also dismissed without going into merit. The Civil Appeal No. 6875-6877/04 and 7434/04 are directed against the final judgment and order dated 17/10/03 passed in A.S. Nos. 754/02, 759/02, 760/02 and 128/92 by the Madras High Court whereby the High Court by its impugned judgment and order dismissed the appeals filed by the appellants.

(2.) The appellants were not satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, so there were 12 LAO Ps filed before the Reference Court. The Reference Court enhanced the compensation and fixed it at the rate of Rs. 6/-per sq. ft. Both the appellants and respondent filed appeals before the High Court. The High Court was pleased to remand back the appeals to the Reference Court except A.S. No. 298/92.

(3.) In A.S. No. 298/92, the appellants moved CMP No. 15057/97 to condone the delay of 7 days in filing the cross objection. The High Court dismissed the said application. Consequently, the cross appeal of appellants was dismissed. As far as the appeal filed by the respondent in A.S. No. 298/92 was concerned, the High Court referred its judgment in A.S. No. 71/92 which was in reference to the same scheme for the adjoining survey No. and in which the High Court enhanced the market value to Rs. 9/- per sq. ft. and thereby the High Court in its impugned judgment and order dated 18/1/2001 also enhanced the market value of the land involved in A.S. No. 298/92 to Rs. 9/- per sq. ft., and deducted 33-1/3% towards development charges and ultimately the compensation was fixed at Rs. 6/- per sq. ft. The High Court also rejected the claim of interest on solatium Under Section 23(2) and additional compensation Under Section 23(1A) of the Act.