ASSTT COLLECTOR TIRUVALLUR Vs. C RAMAMOORTHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under S.54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') at the instance of the Assistant Collector, Tiruvallur, has been preferred against the order of the Sub-Court, Tiruvallur, in L.A.O.P. No.25 of 1981, on a reference made to it under S.18 of the Act.

(2.) An extent of 1.65 acres in survey No.2/2 and another extent of 1.27 acres in survey No.3/1 with a well in Periakuppam, village, tiruvallur taluk, Chengalpattu District, classified in the revenue records as 'wet' were acquired under the provisions of the Act for the construction of a Bus Depot for Pallavan Transport Corporation. The notification under S.4(1) of the Act was published on 27-7-1977. Before the Land Acquisition Officer, the claimant prayed that compensation in respect of the acquired lands should be awarded at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per cent, in addition to the compensation for the well situate in one of the acquired properties. The Land Acquisition Officer, on a consideration of the sales statistics, determined the compensation payable in respect of the acquired lands at Rs. 118.80 per cent and also fixed Rs. 2,135/- as compensation in respect of the well with usual solatium. In doing so, the Land Acquisition Officer took into account an instance of sale of 5.04 acres of land of the same and soil in survey No.540/ 1 on 21-2-1975 as the basis for fixing the market value of the lands under acquisition and considering the time interval between that instance of sale and the date of publication of the notification under S.4(1) of the Act, added Rs. 18.80 per cent to the market value reflected by that instance of sale. Not satisfied with this, the claimant sought a reference to Court under S.18 of the Act and on a consideration of the oral as well as the documentary evidence, the Court fixed the compensation at the rate of Rs. 1500/- per cent in respect of the acquired lands with usual solatium and awarded interest at 4% p.a. from the date of dispossession. It is the correctness of this that is questioned by the State in Appeal No.34 of 1985, while the claimant, in the Memorandum of Cross-Objections, has prayed that compensation should be awarded in respect of the acquired lands at Rs. 1,700/- per cent.

(3.) We may immediately point out that on behalf of the State no documents were filed in the course of the proceedings before the Court below. Only the claimant relied upon five instances of sales marked as Exhibits C. 1 to C. 5. From a perusal of Exhibits C.1 and C.2, it is found that the transactions related to composite sales comprising of vacant site as well as superstructures thereon. Exhibits C. 1 and C. 2 cannot, in our view, be considered to furnish a satisfactory basis for fixing the market value of the acquired lands. That leaves for consideration Exhibits C.3 to C.5. Under Exhibit C.3 dt. 8-3-1976, an extent of 1 Ground and 1,178 sq. ft. had been sold for Rs. 5,220/- though the market value according to the guidelines had been mentioned as Rs. 7,455/-. A consideration of the description of property sold under Exhibit C.3 shows that the property is a well developed building site laid out as plots with provision made for roads as well. The acquired lands are wet lands and, therefore, the instance of sale under Exhibit C.3 cannot afford a comparable basis for fixing the market value of the acquired lands. Exhibit C.5 is the registration copy of a sale deed dt. 10-6-1974 in respect of a site measuring east-west 34 feet and north south 53 feet in survey No.29/2. A consideration of the location of the property dealt with under Exhibit C.5 shows that it is not anywhere near the vicinity of the acquired properties. We are of the view that that instance of sale would not be of any assistance in determining the market value of the acquired lands. We are, therefore, left only with Exhibit C.4 dt. 27-5-1977 executed by Parvathi Ammal and others in favour of one Ranganatha Pillai for Rs. 12,500/-. That shows that 7 cents of land in the vicinity of the lands acquired had been sold for Rs. 12,500/- and the rate per cent works out to Rs. 1,724/-. We also find from Exhibit C.6 that the claimant has taken the necessary steps for obtaining a plan for laying out the acquired properties as house-sites. It is obvious that but for the acquisition, the claimant would have laid out the acquired lands into house-sites by making the necessary improvements therefore and sold them as such. The potential user as house-sites of the acquired lands, though classified as wet lands, has also to be taken into account. We had earlier pointed out that the only instance of comparable sale is under Exhibit C.4 and that shows that the rate per cent works out to Rs. 1,724/- even so, the Court below has awarded only Rs. 1,500/- per cent. The Court below was aware that the acquired lands are situate in a very important locality and very near the Government Hospital, Courts, Taluk Office, School, etc., and that it abuts the Madras-Tiruttani Main Road. Considering the locational advantages enjoyed by the acquired lands and also the market value reflected by Exhibit C.4, which, as we had pointed out earlier, is the only instance of comparable sale, we are of the view that a fair, just and reasonable compensation in respect of the acquired lands should be fixed at Rs. 1,700/- per cent.