Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 780 (MAD)

Special Tahsildar (ADW) v. S. Venkatesan

2014-03-27

R.KARUPPIAH

body2014
JUDGMENT 1. This revision petitioner / Land Acquisition Officer filed this revision petition against the judgment and decree made in C.M.A.No.11 of 1996 dated 05.10.2005 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Tirupattur. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and perused the materials on record. 3. The revision petitioner acquired the respondent's lands to an extent of 1.16 acres in T.S.No.3/1, 3/2 and 3/3 for the purpose of provision for house sites to the house-less Adi Dravidas. The land acquisition officer taken the data land in S.No.403/02 for fixation of compensation. Accordingly, the land acquisition officer fixed the compensation of Rs.47,610/- for the acquired land and passed an award on 22.03.1996. Aggrieved over the above said award, the respondent herein preferred Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in C.M.A.No.11 of 1996. The Tribunal has discussed about the potential value of the acquired land, distance factor and all other relevant factors, taken the adjacent land in S.No.5/1, the sale deed executed in the year 1991 as per Ex.C1 as data land and also considered the suit property acquired in the year 1997 and hence, fixed as Rs.12/- per sq.ft. After deducting 1/3rd amount for road and other development charges and fixed Rs.8/- per sq.ft., for the respondent's acquired land and awarded the compensation of Rs.1,36,905.50 with interest at the rate of 9% from 22.03.1996 to 21.03.1997 and 12% from 22.03.1997 to 21.03.1998 and 15% from 22.03.1998 to till date of payment. Being aggrieved in the above said award passed by the Tribunal, the revision petitioner preferred this Civil Revision Petition. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner has not seriously objected the value of the acquired land fixed by the Tribunal, but, mainly challenged the interest awarded by the Tribunal as excessive. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the Tribunal has correctly taken the data land for fixation of compensation and correctly arrived the compensation and further, the interest also not excessive. Therefore, there is no need to interfere with the above said award passed by the Tribunal. 5. A perusal of the award passed by the Tribunal revealed that the Tribunal has correctly considered the potential value of the acquired land and also period of sale deed in Ex.C1 and all other relevant factors, correctly fixed the compensation and therefore, there is no need to interfere with the compensation arrived by the Tribunal. 5. A perusal of the award passed by the Tribunal revealed that the Tribunal has correctly considered the potential value of the acquired land and also period of sale deed in Ex.C1 and all other relevant factors, correctly fixed the compensation and therefore, there is no need to interfere with the compensation arrived by the Tribunal. With regard to the interest, the Tribunal has awarded at the rate of 9% from 21.03.1997 and 12% from 22.03.1997 to 21.03.1998 and 15% from 22.03.1998 to till date of payment. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, as per provisions of Act 31 of 78, the respondent is entitled to an interest at the rate of 6%. This Court has already reduced the interest and fixed the interest as 6% in several cases. Therefore, in the instant case also, the rate of interest is to be reduced as 6% uniformly, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner. 6. In the result, this Civil Revision Petition is partly allowed and reduced and fixed the interest at the rate of 6% from the date of notification till date of payment. With regard to the other aspects, the award passed by the Tribunal is confirmed. No order as to costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed.