TAMIL NADU AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY Vs. KORAKKAN (DIED)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents 2 and 3 in the execution petition who are the beneficiaries in the acquisition proceedings arising out of land acquisition proceedings are the revision petitioners.

(2.) The lands belonging to the respondents in the revision petitions were acquired for the purpose of expansion of Government Horticulture Research Station by way of 4(1) Notification dtd. 30/7/1986. The Land Acquisition Officer/ Revenue Divisional Officer had fixed certain amount as compensation. Challenging the same, a reference was made under Sec. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act in LAOP.Nos.22 and 23 of 1992 before the Sub Court, Periyakulam. The learned Subordinate Judge enhanced the compensation. Challenging the same, the Acquisition Officer had filed A.S.Nos.130 to 133 of 1995 before the High Court. The Division Bench of High Court was pleased to dispose of the appeal fixing compensation at Rs.300.00 per cent and Rs.500.00 for each coconut tree by way of an order dtd. 3/12/2003.

(3.) In order to execute the said award, the claimants had filed E.P.Nos.40, 41 and 42 of 2008 and 7 of 2009 before the Subordinate Court, Periyakulam for attachment of movable and immovable properties. After considering the calculation memo filed on either side, the learned Subordinate Judge had passed an order on 19/12/2011 allowing the execution petitions. The said orders were challenged in CRP(MD).No.793 to 796 of 2012 by the beneficiaries of the acquisition proceedings. This Court by an order dtd. 26/6/2012 arrived at a finding that the amount deposited by the beneficiaries of the acquisition proceedings has not been deducted by the Executing Court at each stage which has led to the confusion. This Court has also referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2006 8 SCC 457 ( Gurpreet Singh Vs. Union of India) with regard to the calculation of interest. This Court in Paragraph No.8 of the order, had further found that the execution petitions had been allowed simply based upon the calculation memo without giving credit to the amount deposited by the petitioner at each stage.