LAWS(MAD)-2004-7-83

SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR Vs. RANGANAYAGI

Decided On July 15, 2004
SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR Appellant
V/S
RANGANAYAGI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the judgment and decree of the VI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Madras dated 30.10.1991 made in L.A.O.P.No.35 of 1982, the Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition), Tamil Nadu Housing Board Scheme, Madras has filed the above appeal.

(2.) AN extent of 19 cents of land in T.S.No.127/5 in Arumbakkam village were acquired by the Government for the purpose of laying a road for MMDA. For the said purpose, the Government issued Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (Central Act) and the same was published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 7.9.1977. The Land Acquisition Officer after completing the formalities passed an award in Award No.1/79 dated 20.6.1979 and fixed compensation at the rate of Rs.4,000/= per ground. Not satisfied with the said amount, at the instance of the land owner, the matter was referred to the Court below, which resulted in L.A.O.P.No.35 of 1982. Before the court below, the claimant herself has examined as C.W.1 and has not produced any document in support of her claim of higher compensation. On the side of the Referring Officer, one Somasundaram has been examined as R.W.1 and Exs.R1 to R3 were marked in support of their stand. The learned trial Judge after considering the relevant materials, particularly placing reliance on Exs.R1 and R2 fixed the compensation at the rate of Rs.7,500/= per ground and Rs.1,000/= for shifting charges from Arumbakkam to Thiru-Vi-Ka Nagar. In addition to the above amount, the trial Judge has also granted other statutory amounts including additional compensation at the rate of 12% under Section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act. Questioning the same, the Special Deputy Collector has filed the present appeal.

(3.) IT is the evidence of the claimant as C.W.1 that since her house (dwelling house) also acquired along with the ground, she has to secure a house at Thiru-vi-ka Nagar and transported all her belongings from Arumbakkam to Thiru-vi-ka Nagar. In the light of the above referred clause, which is the relevant factor, which the Reference Court has to consider while determining compensation, we are of the view that the grant of Rs.1,000/= by the Reference Court is quite reasonable and acceptable. Accordingly, we reject the second contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant.