Judgment :- 1. This appeal has been directed against the award in LAOP.No.17 of 1996 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Pondicherry at Karaikal (Land Acquisition Tribunal). 2. Heard the Government Pleader (Pondicherry). An extent of 18.58 Ares of land was acquired in Ward-F Block-4, Town Survey No.16 of Karaikal Municipality of Karaikal for providing play ground facilities for the students of Govindasamy Pillai Government High School, Karaikal. 3. The Land Acquisition Officer, after following the formalities caused publication of notice under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in the Government Gazette No.52 dated 212. 1992. The Land Acquisition Officer on the basis of the data land Ex.B.3 alongwith survey map Ex.B.4 has fixed the market value of the land under acquisition as Rs.44,444/-per Are on the ground that if the guide line value for the acquired land is only Rs.35,700/-per Are and accordingly, passed the Award No.1-1995 dated 28.03.1995. Aggrieved by the said Award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer the claimants had raised their objections before the Land Acquisition Officer, who in turn had referred the same under Section 18 of the Act to the Land Acquisition Tribunal. 4. Before the Land Acquisition Tribunal the first claimant was examined as C.W.1 and Ex.C.1 was marked on the side of the claimants. On the side of the respondents the Tahsildar was examined as R.W.1 and Ex.R.1 to Ex.R.4 were marked on the side of the respondents. The Land Acquisition Tribunal after going through the evidence placed before it both oral and documentary and after giving due consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the claimants as well as the Government Pleader, has enhanced the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer from Rs.44,444/- per Are to Rs.65,000/-per Are, which necessitated the Government of Pondicherry to prefer this appeal. 5. The points for determination in this appeal are as follows:- 1) Whether the quantum of compensation enhanced and fixed by the Land Acquisition Tribunal on the basis of Ex.A.1 dated 26. 1991 is sustainable? 2) Whether the judgment in LAOP.No.17 of 1996 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Pondicherry at Karaikal, is liable to be set aside for the reasons stated in memorandum of appeal? 1991 is sustainable? 2) Whether the judgment in LAOP.No.17 of 1996 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Pondicherry at Karaikal, is liable to be set aside for the reasons stated in memorandum of appeal? 6.Point No.1 :- Under Ex.C.1, dated 25.06.1991, 19 Ares of land in Ward No.F in T.S.No.16, R.S.No.77/1 part in Block No.40 was sold for Rs.30,000/-. The Land Acquisition Tribunal taking into consideration the potentiality of the land and also taking into consideration the nature of the land sold under Ex.A.1 held that the land acquired by the Government and the land sold under Ex.A.1 are similar in nature and enhanced the compensation from Rs.44,444/- per Are to Rs.65,000/-per Are. A perusal of the Award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer (Ex.B.2) will go to show that the lands acquired were dry lands fit to provide play ground facility for the students of the Government High School at Karaikal and the same was in Ward No.C in Block No.40 in T.S.No.16 in R.S.No.77/1 part, whereas the land sold under Ex.A.1 is situated in Ward No.F in Block No.40, T.S.No.16, R.S.No.77/1 part. The classification of the land as per the sale deed Ex.A.1 dated 26. 1991 is that it was garden land. The Land Acquisition Officer after taking into consideration about 188 data lands, and on the basis of data land Nos.29, 106, 107, 159 and 168 to the Award No.1/95 has come to the conclusion that the land sold under data land Nos.29, 106, 107, 159 and 168 are all similar in nature having similar potentiality to that of the land acquired by the Government, had fixed the compensation for the land acquired by the Government, had fixed the compensation for the land acquired as Rs.44,444/-per Are, which is over and above the guide line value for the land that was prevailing during the year 1992 as Rs.35,000/-. But the Land Acquisition Officer taking into consideration the potentiality of the land acquired has fixed the compensation as Rs.44,444/-per Are taking into consideration the land acquired is fit to provide play ground facilities for the students of the Government High School at Karaikal. But the Land Acquisition Officer taking into consideration the potentiality of the land acquired has fixed the compensation as Rs.44,444/-per Are taking into consideration the land acquired is fit to provide play ground facilities for the students of the Government High School at Karaikal. So the compensation enhanced and fixed as Rs.65,000/- per Are by the Land Acquisition Tribunal on the basis of Ex.A.1 dated 25.06.1991 cannot be said to be justifiable because the nature of the land sold under Ex.A.1-sale deed, garden land differs from the land acquired, dry land. Point No.1 is answered accordingly. 7.Point No.2:- In view of my findings in the earlier paragraph I hold on point No.2 that the judgment in LAOP.No.17 of 1996, dated 212. 1998, by the Land Acquisition Tribunal / Additional District Judge, Pondicherry at Karaikal, is liable to be set aside and the award of compensation of Rs.44,444/-per Are fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer is to be restored. 8.In fine, the appeal is allowed and the judgment in LAOP.No.17 of 1996, dated 212. 1998, by the Land Acquisition Tribunal, / Additional District Judge, Pondicherry at Karaikal, is hereby set aside and the award of compensation of Rs.44,444/-per Are fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer in Award No.1 of 1995 dated 23. 1995 (Ex.B.2) is restored and the compensation is fixed as Rs.44,444/-per Are. The claimants are entitled to solatuim, interest on solatuim and additional compensation as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. The learned Government Pleader submits that the entire award amount has already been deposited in the Court and as per the order in CMP.No.9557 of 1999 the claimants had already withdrawn 50% of the award amount and the balance of 50% was directed to be invested in the Sate Bank of India at Karaikal Branch. Under such circumstance, as per the Award of the Land Acquisition Officer the claimants can withdraw the balance of award amount after adjusting 50% of the award amount they had withdrawn from the deposit made bythe appellants herein. The appellants herein are entitled to the balance with interest if any after adjustment. No costs.