ASSISTANT COLLECTOR (L A) SIVAKASI Vs. RASUL MOHAIDEEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Referring Officer, namely, the Assistant Collector (Land Acquisition), Sivakasi is the appellant in this case and the appeal is against the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge, Srivilliputhur in L.A.O.P.No.5 of 1995, dated 03.02.2004.

(2.) The brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of this appeal are as follows:

(3.) Before the Sub Court, the claimant filed statement with regard to the income and expenditure in respect of the orchard acquired by the appellant. The claimant, examined himself as C.W.1 and examined one Ramalingam as C.W.2, who is a Post Graduate in Agriculture and has given evidence on behalf of the claimant that the claimant has planted several species on his advice and about the income from each fruit-bearing tree. The Lower Court enhanced the compensation for the land from 100 per cent to 500 per cent, i.e., Rs.50,000/- per acre. Since about 100 coconut trees were less than three years old, the lower Court fixed the compensation at Rs.9,600/- for 96 trees and Rs.1,000/- for 185 coconut trees. With regard to the other trees, no compensation was fixed and a sum of Rs.14,000/- was awarded towards the pump-set and other infrastructure provided by the claimant for the purpose of irrigating the plants. Aggrieved by the award passed by the Sub Judge, in L.A.O.P.No.5 of 1995, the Referring Officer, namely, the Assistant Collector (Land Acquisition) has preferred the above appeal.