JAYARAMAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Review Application has been filed by the respondents as review applicants against the judgment and decree dated 23.02.2001 and made in A.S. No.591 of 1994 on the file of this Court.

(2.) THE lands of the review applicants in Ward No.G Block No.3 and T.S. No.17/7 in Keezhaveli Village, Karaikal Commune and Taluk were acquired for construction of a Stadium to provide playground facilities to the students of schools and colleges at Karaikal by the Union of India, the first respondent herein, through the Land Acquisition Officer - cum - Sub-Collector (Revenue), Karaikal, Pondicherry, the second respondent herein, by issuing a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act on 26.12.1989 after getting approval of the Government in G.O. Ms. No.82 dated 14.12.1989 and after following the procedure to be followed for acquisition of the lands under the said Act. THE second respondent, after taking into consideration of the data sale deeds in sales statistics, fixed the market value of the lands acquired from the review applicants at Rs.2550/- per Are. THE matter was referred to the Reference Court, at the request of the review applicants, and the Reference Court, after taking into consideration of the material evidence placed before the said Court, fixed the market value of the land at Rs.13,500/- per Are in L.A.O.P. No.37 of 1993 on the file of the Reference Court (Additional District Judge, Pondicherry at Karaikal). Aggrieved at the Award passed by the Reference Court on 24.01.1994 in L.A.O.P. No.37 of 1993 referred to above, the respondents herein as appellants have filed the appeal in A.S. No.591 of 1994 on the file of this Court. THE said appeal was heard along with another appeal in A.S. No. 583 of 1994 filed against one A.V.Subramanian by the respondents herein as appellants.

(3.) IN MEHARBAN AND OTHERS, ETC. vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS (AIR 1997 SC 2664), the Honourable Apex Court was pleased to hold that since none connected with the sale deeds was examined, the sale deeds are inadmissible in evidence though certified copies marked under Section 51-A of the Land Acquisition Act are available and that, therefore, all the sale deeds stand excluded. It has also been held that it is the duty of the Court to take all the relevant factors into account before determination of the compensation. The same principle has been laid down by the Honourable Apex Court in A.P. STATE BOARD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, HYDERABAD vs. P.VENKAIAH AND OTHERS (1997 (1) SCC 128) by following the decision rendered in MEHARBAN AND OTHERS, ETC. vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS (AIR 1997 SC 2664) (cited supra). The law laid down by the Honourable Apex Court was in force as referred to above while the judgment by this Division Bench was delivered on 23.02.201.