The Land Acquisition Officer v. Kandasamy Gounder
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.11.2022 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SUNDAR AND THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE N. MALA A.S.Nos.868 & 952 of 2010 and M.P.Nos.1 & 1 of 2010 The Land Acquisition Officer/ Special Tahsildar (LA) Unit-2, Bharathiar University, Coimbatore.
... Appellant in A.S.No.868 of 2010 The Land Acquisition Officer/ Special Tahsildar (LA) Unit-3, Bharathiar University, Coimbatore.
... Appellant in A.S.No.952 of 2010 Vs.
1.Kandasamy Goudar 2.Marudha Goudar 3.Nanjappa Goudar 4.Marudhappa Goudar Marudhappa Goudar (deceased) 5.K.Palanisamy
6.Karuppusamy 7.Palanisamy 8.Chinnasamy 9.Periya Muniammal 10.Chinna Muniammal 11.Jeya Subbammal (deceased) 12.Marudhappa Goudar Sivasamy (deceased) K.M.Rangasamy Goundar (deceased) K.R.Kuppusamy Goundar (deceased) 13.Marudhakkal 14.Annapoorani 15.Sarojini 16.Rangasamy Palanisamy (deceased) 17.Ramasamy Goudar Nanjunda Goudar (deceased) 18.Rajammal 19.Ponnusamy 20.Chinnasamy 21.Marudhappa Goudar 22.Sivaraj (minor) Guardian through S/o.Krishnasamy 23.Amsa 24.Periya Marudhakkal P.R.Kandasamy (deceased) Royappa Goudar (deceased) Ayyasamy (deceased) Rangammanl (deceased) 25.Sankarammal 26.Rani 27.Ramasamy Chettiar 28.Karuppanna Mudaliar
29.Baladevaraj Arora 30.Marude Goundar 31.Nanjappa Gounder 32.Ramasamy Chettiar 33.Rayappan Goudar 34.Nanjammal 35.Subbammal 36.Periya Thampan @ Natarajan 37.Chinna Thampan 38.Chinnamani 39.Rajendran 40.Kandasamy Goudar 41.Nanjammal 42.Marudhappa Gounder 43.Kare Goudar 44.Marudhakkal 45.Rajammal 46.Nanjammal 47.Solavammal 48.Nanjammal 49.Subbulakshmi 50.K.M.Karuppusamy 51.K.M.Palanisamy 52.K.M.Chinnsamy 53.Muthusamy 54.Ramanathan 55.Padmavathi 56.Nanjammal 57.Saraswathi 58.A.Rameshkumar 59.A.Rajeswari (minor) Guardian & mother through S/o.B.K.Ayyasamy 60.Rukkammal 61.Rangarajan
62.R.Santhamani 63.Rajamani 64.Pasuvammal 65.S.Balakumar 66.S.Geetha 67.K.S.Yesotha D.D.Saroja (deceased) 68.Thenmozhi 69.Malathi 70.Sumathi 71.Rathi 72.Bharathi 73.Udayakumar 74.Marudhammal 75.Subbammal 76.Palaniammal 77.Kokilavani 78.Manoharan 79.Poonggodi 80.Makeshkumar 81.Paranthaman 82.Subbulakshmi 83.Thulasiammal 84.R.Shanmugasundaram 85.Subramaniam 86.Murugesan 87.R.Sathiyamoorthy 88.S.Indrani @ Rani 89.The Registrar, Bharathiar University, Coimbatore.
... Respondents in A.S.No.868 of 2010
1.C.Dhandayudhuapani 2.M/s.Ambika & Co.
298, Grass Cut Road, Coimbatore.
3.Vetae Gounder 4.Muthae Gounder 5.M/s.Gourah Equipments Pvt. Ltd.
12/216, N.S.R.Ayyangar Road, Saibaba Colony, Coimbatore.
6.Sarojini 7.Lakshmi C.Lakshmana Mudaliar (deceased) 8.Muthusamy Mudaliar Palaniammal (deceased) Pachiammal (deceased) 9.Visalakshi 10.Ramaathal Vadivelu (deceased) Kannappan (deceased) 11.Angammal 12.Kamalathal Deivanaiammal (deceased) 13.Palaniappa Chettiyar 14.Somasundaram 15.Subbathal 16.Palanisamy 17.Rangammal 18.Manjulatha Sharma Ravala Gounder (deceased) Sadaiyappa Gounder (deceased) 19.Muthusamy 20.Savithri 21.Seetharamagupta 22.Lakshmi
23.K.Suseela 24.K.Subramaniam 25.Devika 26.K.Vasanthamani 27.Minor Karthikeyan Guardian and mother Lakshmi 28.Marudhakkal 29.Kulandaivel 30.Tamilarasi 31.V.Arumugam 32.Kalaivani 33.Maragadham 34.Kuppammal 35.Santhamani 36.Jayanthi 37.Velusamy 38.Ponnammal 39.Ayyasamy 40.Kamala 41.Veerabathiran 42.The Registrar, Bharathiyar University, Coimbatore - 46.
... Respondents in A.S.No.952 of 2010 Common Prayer : Appeal Suits in A.S.Nos.868 and 952 of 2010 filed under 54 of the Land Acquisition Act against the order and decree dated 29.10.2007 in L.A.O.P.Nos.105 and 107 of 1986, respectively, on the file of the I Additional Sub-Court, Coimbatore.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Chandrasekaran Special Government Pleader in both appeals For R5, R9 to R16, R18, R21 to R23, R33, R35, R36, R45, R47 to R50, R52, R83 to R88 : Mr.R.Bharath Kumar in A.S.No.868 of 2010 For R14, R15, R25, R26, R53 to R58, R60 to R79, R81 & R82 : Mr.V.Anandhamoorthy in A.S.No.868 of 2010 For R89 : Mr.C.Vigneswaran, Standing Counsel assisted by Mr.P.Vasantha Kumar in A.S.No.868 of 2010 For R1, R2, R6, R7, R9 R11 to R14, R16, R17, R19, R22 to R28, R30 to R37, R39 and R41 : Mr.V.Anandhamoorthy in A.S.No.952 of 2010 For R42 : Mr.C.Vigneswaran, Standing Counsel assisted by Mr.P.Vasantha Kumar in A.S.No.952 of 2010
C O M M O N J U D G M E N T (Judgment was delivered by S.S. SUNDAR, J.) The above appeals are by the Land Acquisition Officer aggrieved by the order and decree of the Reference Court enhancing the compensation to Rs.3,300/- per cent for the lands acquired by the Government for Bharathiyar University in Vadavalli Village, in Coimbatore North Taluk. 2.Vast extent of lands were acquired for Bharathiyar University by the Government in 1980s in Vadavalli and Somaiyampalayam Villages in Coimbatore District. In Vadavalli Village an extent of 701.11 acres were acquired for the said purpose. For convenience, the lands were acquired by splitting in 18 blocks.
A.S.No.868 of 2010 :
3.In respect of an extent of 71.54 Acres in Vadavalli Village, a notification was issued for acquisition under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for brevity) vide
G.O.Ms.No.2361, Education (H) Department, dated 19.12.1979. It is admitted that the said notification was published in Tamil Nadu Government Gazette on 09.01.1980. The Land Acquisition Officer initiated proceedings for passing Award and by proceedings in Award No.2 of 1984, dated 25.02.1984, in respect of 71.54 Acres, the Land Acquisition Officer fixed the compensation at Rs.5,000/- per Acre, i.e., Rs.50/- per cent. A.S.No.952 of 2010 :
4.Similarly, in respect of an extent of 25.10 Acres in Vadavalli Village, a notification was issued for acquisition under Section 4(1) of the Act vide G.O.Ms.No.840, Education, Science and Technology Department, dated 04.05.1982. It is admitted that the said notification was published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette on 02.06.1982. The Land Acquisition Officer initiated proceedings for passing Award and by proceedings in Award No.3 of 1984, dated 04.05.1984, in respect of 25.10 Acres, the Land Acquisition Officer fixed the compensation at Rs.8,547/- per Acre, i.e., Rs.85.47 per cent.
5.Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded, the land owners/claimants preferred petitions before the Land Acquisition Officer for reference before the Civil Court to get just compensation. Accordingly, the Land Acquisition Officer referred the cases under Section 18 of the Act. The Reference Court, in L.A.O.P.Nos.105 of 1986 (against Award No.2 of 1984) and 107 of 1986 (against Award No.3 of 1984), though passed independent orders in each case, relied upon same documents and ultimately, enhanced the compensation to Rs.3,300/- per cent for the acquired lands, in respect the lands covered under different Notifications under Section 4[1] in respect of the lands acquired in Vadavalli village. A.S.No.868 of 2010 is preferred against the judgment and decree in LAOP.No.105 of 1986 and A.S.No.952 of 2010 is preferred against the judgment and decree in LAOP.No.107 of 1986.
6.Challenging the enhancement of compensation, the above appeals are filed by the Land Acquisition Officer.
7.The claimants have filed four documents Exs.C1 to C4. The document Ex.C1 is dated 11.07.1977, which is a sale deed in respect of a house site in the same village. The document Ex.C2 is dated 09.09.1982. From that, it is seen that 8 cents of land have been sold for a sum of Rs.24,000/- indicating that the market value was Rs.3,000/- per cent. The document Ex.C3 is another sale deed, dated 29.02.1984, which is in respect of an extent of 4 cents and the sale deed is in respect of property in Somaiyampalayam Village. It is seen that the document Ex.C4 is long after the acquisition and it is dated 24.03.2006. An extent of 1 Ground has been sold for a sum of Rs.4,75,000/- in 2006.
8.From the documents Exs.C2 to C4, it is seen that the villages Somaiyampalayam and Vadavalli are developed and have become a part of Coimbatore Corporation long back. The Land Acquisition Officer appears to have collected 362 sale deeds between 09.01.1977 to 09.01.1980, while fixing the compensation for the acquired lands. Out of 362 sale deeds, most of the documents were discarded either on the ground that the lands are agricultural lands or on the ground that the sale deeds are in respect of very
small extent of land. From the Award, details of all the sale exemplars or sales statistics collected for two years prior to the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act, is not seen. However, the fact that the Land Acquisition Officer has chosen to rely upon the sale deed which shows the lowest market value, can be seen. It is seen that several sale deeds were in respect of plots or house sites and it is seen that several real estate promoters have invested money for development of lands as house sites. This aspect of the case is gathered from the reading of Award, and the position in 1982 gives an indication that the lands are more suitable for residential purposes having regard to the development in and around the villages. It is not in dispute that the acquired lands are situated on either side of the main road from Coimbatore to Marudhamalai and they are now part of Coimbatore Corporation.
9.The potentiality of the lands, as spoken to by the claimants, is admitted by the Land Acquisition Officer himself during cross-examination. The Reference Court, relying upon the sale deed Ex.C2 dated 09.09.1982 and the document Ex.C3 dated 29.02.1984, fixed the compensation at
Rs.3,300/- per cent. The documents Exs.C2 and C3 are after issuance of notification under Section 4(1) of the Act. The document Ex.C4 dated 24.03.2006 was relied upon only to show that there was a steep rise in price of land over a period of 20 years after acquisition. This Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court have held that, such post-notification sale may also be relevant, if it is established that the value of the land remained constant during the relevant point of time. In the absence of Ex.C1, the reference to post-notification sales can be resorted to. Though document Ex.R4 dated 29.05.1980 is filed, this Court is unable to accept the same in view of the position that the said document does not reflect the market value and it is not desirable to rely upon the said document to deny just compensation to the land owners.
Having regard to the potentiality and commercial importance of the acquired lands, the documents Exs.C2 and C3 can be relied upon for the purpose of fixing the compensation. The compensation in respect of the lands acquired, which are subject matter in these appeals, cannot be less than Rs.3,000/- to Rs.10,000/- per cent. Ex.C3 is around 3 1⁄2 years after the acquisition and the market value is more than Rs.11,000/- per cent in Somaiyampalayam, which is an adjacent village.
10.The Reference Court has fixed the compensation on the basis of several documents that were produced by the claimants. The Reference Court, after considering the documents which are from 1977 to 1984, has fixed the compensation at Rs.3,300/- per cent. Though the Reference Court has relied upon both pre and post-notification sales, this Court is of the view that compensation at Rs.3,300/- per cent fixed by the Reference Court can be approved, in view of the serious prejudice that is caused to the land owners in the present case.
11.The lands were acquired in 1980s and the Awards were passed in 1984. Though the value of the land per cent was around Rs.3,000/- even at the time of notification, the compensation fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer in 1984 and the amount that was made available to the land owners was only Rs.50/- per cent as per Award No.2 of 1984. Even after adding the statutory components like solatium and additional interest, the compensation that had reached the hands of the claimants in 1984 was around 3% of the value determined by Reference Court. With the rise in
price, the land value has gone up atleast by 21 times within a span of 20 years, as seen from Ex.C4. From the compensation that may be paid to the land owners on the basis of the order passed by the Reference Court, the land owners may not be in a position to acquire 1/50th of the land, they have lost in acquisition. Therefore, this Court is of the view that great injustice has been done to the land owners, because of the very low amount that was paid by the Land Acquisition Officer and due to the delay in disposal of these appeals. Though the claimants are entitled to additional interest as contemplated under Section 23(1A) of the Act, and interest on the differential amount @ 9% p.a. for the first year from the date of taking possession and @ 15% p.a. thereafter, and also to other statutory benefits in the present case, the same may not mitigate the loss suffered by the claimants, for the reasons indicated above particularly on account of the delay of nearly 40 years.
12.For all the above reasons, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the orders of the Reference Court. Accordingly, these appeals are dismissed
and the order and decree of the Reference Court stand confirmed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 13.After pronouncing the judgment, counsel representing Mr.N.Manokaran, submitted that they have filed change of vakalat for the Bharathiyar University and they are no more the Standing Counsel for the Bharathiyar University. However, Mr.C.Vigneswaran, learned counsel, assisted by Mr.P.Vasantha Kumar, is now appearing before this Court for the Bharathiyar University. Therefore, the name of M/s.N.Manokaran shall be deleted from the cause list and the name of Mr.C.Vigneswaran shall be printed for the Bharathiyar University.
(S.S.S.R., J.) (N.M., J.) 07.11.2022 (2/2) mkn Internet : Yes Index : Yes / No
To 1.The I Additional Sub-Judge, Coimbatore.
2.The Land Acquisition Officer/ Special Tahsildar (LA) Unit-2, Bharathiar University, Coimbatore.
3.The Land Acquisition Officer/ Special Tahsildar (LA) Unit-3, Bharathiar University, Coimbatore.
4.The Registrar, Bharathiar University, Coimbatore.
5.The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Chennai.
S.S. SUNDAR , J.
and N. MALA, J.
mkn A.S.Nos.868 & 952 of 2010 07.11.2022 (2/2)