(Anil R. Dave and Adarsh Kumar Goel, JJ.)
Radha Krishnachetty & Anr. _________________________ Appellant(s)
v.
Spl. Tahsildar Laq & Anr. _________________________ Respondent(s)
Civil Appeal No. 5930-5931 of 2010, decided on February 4, 2016
The Judgement of the Court was delivered by
Anil R. Dave, J.:—
1. Heard the learned counsel and considered the peculiar facts of the location of the land in question.
2. Upon perusal of the evidence which had been adduced before the Reference Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, we find that the land adjoining the land in question had been valued at a higher rate. In the circumstances, we enhance the compensation of the land which is subject matter of Second Appeal No. 1003 of 2008 from Rs. 11/- per square foot to Rs. 30/- per square foot, without any deduction therefrom because we have already considered the aspect with regard to the development of the land in question. In addition to Rs. 30/- per square foot, the claimants will be entitled to 30% solatium, instead of 15% solatium as directed by the High Court.
3. So far as the land which is subject matter of Second Appeal No. 1004 of 2008 is concerned, in our opinion Rs. 10/- per square foot would be just and fair compensation and that amount has also been arrived at after deducting development charges etc. Accordingly, in all we grant a sum of Rs. 10/- per square foot with 30% solatium instead of Rs. 5/- per square foot.
4. In addition to the afore-stated compensation, the claimants shall also be entitled to interest and other additional benefits which have already been awarded by the High Court.
5. In view of the above, the civil appeals are disposed of as allowed. No order as to costs.
Civil Appeal No(s). 5930-5931/2010
Radha Krishnachetty & Anr. ________________________ Appellant(s)
v.
Spl. Tahsildar Laq & Anr. _________________________ Respondent(s)
Date : 04/02/2016 These appeals were called on for hearing today.
(Before Anil R. Dave and Adarsh Kumar Goel, JJ.)
For Appellant(s) Mr. M. A. Chinnasamy, Adv.
Mr. C. Rubavathi, Adv.
Mr. M. Krishnan, Adv.
Mr. V. Senthil, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, Adv.
Mr. Jayant Patel, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
Order
6. The civil appeals are disposed of in terms of the non-reportable judgement.
7. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
———
