(1.) THIS appeal has been directed against the award in L. A. O. P. No. 427 of 1983 on the file of the Court of Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore. The Government/referring Officer is the appellant herein. The Land Acquisition Officer has acquired the land belonging to the claimant in S. No. 62/2 measuring 2. 56. 0 Hectares of land in Pachayankuppam Village, Cuddalore for the purpose of providing house sites for the landless poor people belonging to Adi Dravida Community. After observing formalities, the Land Acquisition Officer had published notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act on 27. 7. 1982,the learned Land Acquisition Officer has passed an Award 13/83 dated 1. 8. 1983 fixing the compensation as Rs. 4,500/- per acre ie. , Rs. 45/- per cent. Aggrieved by the findings of the learned Land Acquisition Officer, the claimant had filed his objection before the Referring Officer, who had referred the same to the learned Land Acquisition Tribunal under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.
(2.) BEFORE the Land Acquisition Tribunal, the claimant has examined himself as C. W. 1 and the Special Tahsildar/referring Officer in L. A. O. P. No. 427 of 1983 was examined as R. W. 1 and Special Tahsildar/referring Officer in L. A. O. P. No. 62 of 1984 was examined as R. W. 2 and Special Tahsildar/referring Officer in L. A. O. P. No. 100 of 1986 was examined as R. W. 3. On theside of the claimant, Exs C1 to C3 were marked. After carefully going through the evidence both oral and documentary, the learned Land Acquisition Tribunal has enhanced the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer from Rs. 45/- per cent to Rs. 200/- per cent. Against which, the present appeal has been preferred by the /referring Officer.
(3.) NOW the point for determination in this appeal is whether the award passed by the land Acquisition Tribunal in L. A. O. P. No. 427 of 1983 is liable to be set aside for the reasons stated in the memorandum of appeal?