(Prayer: Appeal Suit filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, against the Judgment and decree, dated 29.09.2004, made in L.A.O.P.No.119 of 2000, on the file of the 3rd Additional Sub Court, Madurai.)
1. This appeal is filed by the State Government as against the determination of compensation by the 3rd Additional Sub Court, Madurai in L.A.O.P.No.119 of 2000 dated 29.09.2004.
2. It is not in dispute that the acquired lands are very close to the National Highways and the lands are developed as house sites. It is also the case of the claimant/respondent that the acquired land is surrounded by Schools, Colleges, Industries and Cinema Theatres and this Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is also nearer to the said land. As against the amount fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer at Rs.1,189/- per cent, the Tribunal fixed the market value at Rs.5,000/- per cent.
3. A reading of the Judgment shows that considering the evidence available on record, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the claimant is entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per cent. The claimant/respondent claimed compensation at the rate of Rs.2,00,000/- per cent, treating his land as a house site. Though claimants filed two documents of sale deeds to show the real market value on the higher side, the sale deeds are much after the date of 4(1) notification. Even though 26 sale deeds prior to the 4(1) notification were referred to in the award, all of them were discarded by Land Acquisition Officer either on the ground that the lands are far away or on the ground that the lands are not similar in taram and assessment. When the market value of the land is required to be decided in this case on the basis of potentiality as house site and other special features, the Land Acquisition Officer's award discarding relevant documents cannot be accepted. No one was examined to discredit the evidence of P.W.2. Having regard to the location and potentiality of the land that is acquired, this Court is not in a position to interfere with the Judgment of the Tribunal and the quantum of compensation.
4. In the result, the First Appeal is dismissed. However, there is no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.