SUB COLLECTOR DINDIGUL Vs. LAKSHMI AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TO form a link road between Chellandiamman Koil and Palani road in Chettinaickanpatty, a strip of land was acquired by the State including the one viz., an extent of 1254 sq.ft. comprised in T.S.No.26 in the said village.

(2.) THE notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act dated 8.12.1971 was duly published. THE Land Acquisition Officer, after following the procedure laid down under the Act, passed an award viz ., Award No.4 of 1978. THE award is dated 15.12.1978, wherein the Land Acquisition Officer fixed the compensation at Rs.14,501.04. THE split up figures are, value of the land at Rs.2.40 per sq.ft. for 1254 sq.ft 'Rs.3,009.60 for the super structure at the rate of Rs.8 for 1200 sq.ft 'Rs.9,600 and damages at 15% - Rs.1,891.44, thus the Land Acquisition Officer passed the award for Rs.14,501.04.

(3.) ON the contrary, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/landlady would contend that even way back in the year 1957, she purchased the property for a sum of Rs.3,500 and that 14 years have elapsed and that there has been steep increase in the price of the land, admittedly when the same is located in an important area in that village. The learned counsel would also contend that fixing the value of the superstructure at Rs.13.10 per sq.ft. is alarmingly low and that the reference Court should have accepted the testimony of PW-2 and the valuation report Ex.A-3 dated 11.1.1990 given by him ought to have been accepted. Yet another contention is raised to the effect that in the acquired premises, she was carrying on hotel business and the turnover was Rs.1,000 per day and also having an ice factory, where again the turnover was Rs.200 per day. Since the respondent/landlady lost all her income, she must be paid damages for which she is entitled to as per Section 23(4) of the Land Acquisition Act.