1

IN THE COURT OF VI ASST – CITY CIVIL JUDGE, CHENNAI

L.A.O.P No: 5 of 2018

Mrs.Radhakalyan,
D/o.S.N.Mahadevan,
N.503. Sreeram Samruddhi,
Varathur Road,
Thoobarahalli, Bangalore,
Karnataka - 560 066
…Claimant
Vs.
1. The District Collector- Cum -Land Acquisition Officer,
Southern Sector of Inner Road Scheme, Phase II
Collector Office, Singaravellar Maligai,
Chennai – 600 001.

2. The Special Tashildar, [Land Acquisition]

Southern Sector of Inner Road Scheme, Phase II
Collector Office, Singaravellar Maligai,
Chennai – 600 001.
…Respondents
CLAIM PETITION FILED BY THE CLAIMANT

THE ADDRESS OF THE CLAIMANT

The Address for service of notices and summons on the above stated
claimant is a stated above and to that of their Counsel M/s. K.M.VENUGOPAL,
E.PARAMASIVAN at 67.Law Chambers, High Court Buildings, Chennai –
600104.

THE ADDRESS OF THE RESPONDENTS

1. The District Collector- Cum -Land Acquisition Officer, Southern

Sector of Inner Road Scheme, Phase II, Collector Office, Singaravellar Maligai,
Chennai – 600 001.
 2

2. The Special Tashildar, [Land Acquisition], Southern Sector of Inner

Road Scheme, Phase II, Collector Office, Singaravellar Maligai, Chennai – 600
001
The Address for service of notices etc., on the Respondents is as stated
above.

1] The Claimant most respectfully submits that she is the law full owner
and occupier of the vacant house site measuring an extent of 2400 Sq.ft., bearing
Plot No.22, Gomathy Nagar at Velachery Village, comprised in Survey No: 710/2
Part situated at Velachery with applicable 30 feet road abutting the above said
Claimant’s house site. The Claimant’s above house site situated Velachery-
St.Thomas Mount Main Road, Velachery. The Claimant’s above said house site
was facing the above said Velachery – St’Thomas Mount Main Road as evidenced
in the sketch enclosed in the sale deed as per schedule of property described
therein. More number of town buses are being run on the Velachery – St’Thomas
Mount Main Road connecting every part of the Chennai Metro City. Since the
Claimant’s property situated abutting and facing the above said main road, attracts
much more commercial value than residential value attracting more monthly rent
and much more market value of the property. The above land had been
acquired by the Respondent for formation of the inner ring road by widening
existing Road namely Velachery-Tambaram Road. The Respondents issued
notice under Sec 15[2] of Tamil Nadu Highways Act-2001, on 18.12.2003 and
enquiry held on 23.01.2004. The Government of Tamil Nadu in their
G.O.Ms.No: 233 Highways [HW2] Department dated 17.08.2004 approved the
proposal under Sec 15[1] of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act 2001 and the same was
published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette No: 35 part II section 2 dated
08.09.2004. Hence the land covered by the above notice under Sec 15[1] of the
Act, vested upon the Government as per Sec 16[1] Tamil Nadu Highways Act
2001 form 08.09.2004 onwards. The possession of the claimant’s land was
taken over by the Respondents here in on 01.10.2005. The very throwaway poor
eyewash compensation was fixed in Award No: 2 of 2009 passed on 21.10.2009
fixing at the rate of Rs.102/- per Sq.ft which is nothing but illegal deprivation of
the claimant’s property on account of expropriation of the Claimant’s property.
 3

No prudent willing vendor could offer to sell the above land to the purchaser to the
above price fixed by the Respondent. No probity purchaser would buy the above
land to the value fixed by the Respondent. That apart no probity Government
will take time of 5 full years to pass award that too eyewash, poor and unpragmatic
compensation.

2] The Claimant most respectfully submits that adding to fuel to burning

fire, acquisition of the claimant’s property was acquired very long back in the year
2003 itself as per sec 15 [2] of Tamil Nadu State Highways Act 2001. After the
lapse of nearly 6 years from the date of expropriation of the claimant’s land, the
above said award was passed violating Art.21, 31 and Art 300-A of Constitution of
India fixing the alleged compensation. The most injustice was caused in passing
very delayed Award No: 2 of 2009 dated 21.10.2009, after acquisition made on
18.12.2003 and delay being caused during the pendency of reference in the
Hon’ble reference court, to fix correct compensation award thereby deprived the
Claimant to purchase the alternative property in the same area or any area within
the limit of Corporation of Chennai. Not only injustice was caused to the
Claimant on account poor and eyewash fixation of market value but also the
injustice was caused huge delay in passing such award so as to deprive the
Claimant from his property illegally and compulsorily without due process of law
warranting additional compensation. The claimant’s property situated well within
the Corporation of Chennai limit. The acquired property of the Claimant
situated well within the close vicinity and proximity to Velachery Bus Terminus
and just opposite to Velachery Railway Station. The acquired land is well
close to Vijaya Nagar at Velachery. The sale value fixed in sale deed
relating to the registered sale deed of data land vide Document No: 783 of 2002
dated 26.02.2002. The relationship of vendor and vendee to the above data
sale deed was not identified by the Respondents in fixing such poor price. It is
relevant to state here that the above sale deed was in pendency of proceedings
under sec 47 [A1] of Indian Stamp Act on account of under valuation of the
data land. When above document is in dispute for under valuation, such
disputed document cannot be legally taken as data for land valuation in to account
as a guiding factor. Hence the data for land valuation cannot be legally considered
for fixing market value of the Claimant’s land acquired, consequently, award
 4

passed based on data land document is not lawful one and fixing compensation
based on such data sale deed is nothing but malafide intention of land grabbing.

3] The Claimant most respectfully submits that however, notice under

Sec 19[7] of Tamil Nadu Highways Act 2001 dated 24.08.2007 was served to the
claimant herein, for determination of compensation. The Claimant participated in
the enquiry in response to the above said notice and demanded a sum of Rs.5000/-
per Sq.ft., as compensation. However disregarding the Claimant request passed
Award in Award No.2/2009 on 21.10.2009 as stated above in most unlawfully and
the same is not in pragmatic. The compensation awarded in paltry and illusory
rate of Rs.102/- Per Sq.ft., which is nothing but State Plunder preventing claimant
to get alternative land at the cost of claimant’s investment. The Respondents made
the claimant in mental shock and suffering, in fixing very poor imaginary figure of
very poor throwaway compensation and thereby made the claimant in unnatural
and unlawful deprivation of claimant’s property under the guise of acquisition of
claimant’s land under Tamil Nadu State Highways Act, 2001. The market value
of the land abutting main road will fetch much more and hence appropriate
compensation is to be awarded by the reference court. Hence request was made
under Sec 20 of Tamil Nadu State Highways Act for making reference of the
above award to the competent civil court for fixation of correct and appropriate
market value.

4] The Claimant now most respectfully submits that it is known fact to

the world at large, that Velachery situated well within the limit of Corporation of
Chennai, had been already developed in all aspects most particularly development
of IT park very well before the acquisition of the Claimant’s land. The potential
importance of Velachery had been known very well as a judicial notice in its
importance in Residential Development, Commercial Development, IT Park
development. The acquired land was well surrounded by well-developed
residential area and I.T parks even very well before the acquisition of the
Claimant’s land. The present market value of land at Velachery is Rs.8000/- per
Sq.ft., in case of residential land and Rs.12,000/- per Sq.ft., in case of commercial
land as on today. But the market value of land at Velachery at the time of
acquisition was Rs.4,000/- per Sq.ft., and actual market value of land at Velachery
 5

as on today is Rs.8,000/- per sq.ft., for residential and Rs.12,000/- per Sq.ft for
commercial area. But for the stamp duty purpose, the market value of the land at
Velachery was undermined than actual passed sale consideration well before the
date of proposal for acquisition.

5] The Claimant submits that the Claimant is able to get a registered sale
deed vide Document No: 4856 of 2002 dated 18.11.2002 executed by
A.T.Varatharajulu and 8 others to and in favour of Mr.Nagarajan and Banumathi
alienating the land measuring and extent of 400 Sq.ft., of undivided share for a sale
price of Rs.4,30,000/- which comes out only a mere sum of Rs.1,075/- per Sq.ft.,
in Survey No: 466 and 464/1A at Velachery. Since the Velachery is highly
developed area well before the acquisition the above said market price of Rs.1075/-
per Sq.ft., in the year November, 2002 and the acquisition proposal was made on
December 2003 minimum 15% escalation cost can be added and thus market value
as on the date of proposal for acquisition as per Sec 15[2] of Tamil Nadu State
Highways Act was Rs.1236.25/- per Sq.ft.,. since no award was even after laps of 6
years from the date of 15[2] of Tamil Nadu State Highways Act made on in the
year 2003, such delay attracts compensatory cost to the barest minimum of 15% to
the land acquired within the limit of Chennai corporation with all basic amenities
surrounded by the thickly developed area in all aspects as stated above. If
minimum of 15% added as escalatory cost in cumulative as per various reported
Judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India to the above said price of Rs.1075/-
per Sq.ft., as per sale deed dated 18.11.2002 to the date of award made on
21.10.2009, the appreciation and escalatory cost by efflux of time of 7 years from
the date of sale in the year 2002 to the date of award in 2009, the price will be
atleast Rs. 3780.98/- per Sq.ft. as on the date of passing award.

6] The Claimant most respectfully submits that even well before the 3
years proceeding to 15[1] notification made in the year 2003, the market value was
Rs. 629/- per Sq.ft., for the land of Undivided share of 600 Sq.ft., as per registered
sale deed vide Document No: 2139 of 2001 executed by Prakash Menon to and in
favour of V.V.S.Mani on 31.08.2000. If yearly minimum appreciation of 15%
per annum added to the above price, from the date of sale made in the year 2000 to
the date of 15[2] notification in the year 2003 under Tamil Nadu State Highways
 6

Act in cumulative effective as per various supreme court judgment the market
value would be Rs.956.62/- per Sq.ft., as on the date of 15[2] notification. Since
there was an inordinate delay of 6 years in passing award after 15[2] notification
made under state highways Act the claimant is not able to receive a single pie of
compensation even after acquisition of land. The loss on account of getting correct
market value as compensation due to inordinate delay the Claimant is entitle to get
escalatory cost of 15% per annum in cumulative effect based on the above sale
value which is arrived at (Rs.629 x 15% /100 for 9 years in cumulative effect )
Rs.1924.07/- per Sq.ft.,. Then only the inordinate delay in passing award will be
compensated. In Land Acquisition Act 1894, there is a ceiling time limit to
pass award within 3 years from the date of 4[1] notification, failing which the
entire acquisition proceedings will be deemed to be lapsed. Unless escalation
cost as stated above added, the delay in passing award is a loot out and swindle of
the claimant’s property. Having notified the claimant’s land for the proposal of
acquisition, very long back, and passing very belatedly award after drastic lapse of
more than 8 years and fixing compensation based on the market value prevailed as
on the date of notification under sec 15 of Tamil Nadu State Highways Act is
highly illegal and unnatural and against the principles of natural justice. By
judiciary notice it is known that from 2003 onwards the cost of land within the
corporation of Chennai had been increased very alarmingly. Hence the Claimant is
entitled to get compensation appropriately.

7] This Claimant most respectfully submits that in earlier acquisition of

the land at Velachery for the formation of bye pass road, 4[1] notification under
Land Acquisition Act 1894 was made on 25.5.2000. The reference court
enhanced compensation from Rs. 76/- to Rs.484/- per Sq.ft., based on registered
sale deed dated 19.3.1997 revealing Rs.400/- per Sq.ft., and fixation of
compensation as Rs. 484/- per sq.ft., based on cumulative escalation of 10% per
annum from the date sale deed to the date of above said 4[1] notification ie only 2
years with cumulative effect from the date of sale deed dated 19.3.1997. The
reference court award passed in LAOP NO:4 of 2004 was challenged in Hon’ble
High Court, Madras in A.S.No: 491 of 2006 which was upheld by Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India in S.L.P. [C] No: 3312 of 2007 on 8.3.2007 accepting the
sale deed dated 19.3.1997 as correct for fixing market value. The Hon’ble
 7

Supreme Court of India further upheld award of reference court confirmed by High
Court, Madras in other connected cases in SLP No: S.L.P. (C) Nos: 2503 of 2007,
2584 of 2007, 2668 of 2007, 2744 of 2007 and 2742 of 2007 dated 19.03.2007.
Having known well about the Supreme court judgment, and having known well
the increased market price at the rate of much more than Rs.3000/- per Sq.ft., of
the land at Velachery it is highly arbitrary exercise of power on the part of the
Respondents to fix compensation at the eyewash rate of Rs.102/- per sq.ft., not
fair.

8] The Claimant most respectfully submits without prejudice to claim of

the Claimant based the latest sale deed prior to the notification made to acquire
the claimant’s land, for assumption sake, that even the above rate of Rs.400/- per
sq.ft., is taken for consideration for fixing market value, based on the above sale
deed dated 19.3.1997 by efflux of time run away by 5 years to reach the date of
notification made on 18.12.2003 to acquire the claimant’s land, made under sec 15
of Tamil Nadu State Highways Act, 2001, since it is known fact that from 2003
onwards the real estate price hiked up to sky limit a barest thrown away minimum
escalation cost of 15 % per annum with cumulative effect, instead of 10% increase
as taken in the above decided old cases to the earlier period, for 6 years Rs.400 X
15/100 X 6 years will come to Rs.925/- per Sq.ft., with cumulative effect as per
Supreme Court verdict. Any enhancement of award, subsequent to the above
prior notification of land acquisition covering the above said verdict pronounced
by Hon’ble Supreme Court India, will be further high in quantum by efflux of
time. Therefore based on the above said Sale deed covered in the above said
Supreme Court judgment, to the subsequent notification for the acquisition of land
at Velachery, the escalation cost can be taken as 15% per annum in cumulative
effect, in view of fast subsequent development made in Velachery that made
increase of high cost of land based on sale deed dated 19.03.1997 in which market
value finalized in the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court. Therefore, it will
be crystal clear proof that, if at all a barest thrown away minimum escalation cost
to the land situated at the capital city of Chennai that too situated well within the
limit of Chennai Corporation limit by 15% per annum if taken as annual escalation
cost with cumulative effect, for 6 years Rs.400 X 15/100 X 6 years will work out at
minimum of Rs.925/- per Sq.ft as per Supreme Court verdict.
 8

9] The Claimant respectfully submits that the above said claim of

escalation of land price at Velachery as barest minimum of 15% per annum can be
proved pragmatically in the sale of land happened in the year 2002 as per
registered sale deed vide Document No: 4856 of 2002 dated 18.11.2002 executed
by A.T.Varatharajulu and 8 others to and in favour of Mr.Nagarajan and
Banumathi the market value of the land at Velachery well before the acquisition of
the claimant’s house site land is Rs.1075/- per Sq.ft., equal to more than 15 % per
annum in cumulative effect of escalation cost. Since in the instant case the
ward was passed with inordinate delay of 7 years after 15[2] notification, the
escalation cost of the land can be made more than 50 % per annum cumulatively.
In the above circumstances, the Respondents fixed very unmindfully eye wash
compensation of Rs.102/- per Sq.ft., as per award passed in Award No: 1 of 2009
dated 02.01.2009 disregarding the current market value is nothing but prove
arbitrariness and abuse of powers of the Respondents and taken away the
claimant’s land by force just like equal to free of cost. Every inch of place at
Velachery is very scarce and unavailable even in case of offering huge payment of
price. Velachery is well within the heart of the Chennai City and well within
the State Head Quarters City of Chennai Corporation limit from very long back.
And well before acquisition of land, Velachery was developed. I.T Park situates at
Velachery boosted market rate of the land and caused severe scarcity of the
availability of the land. Most commercial and residential development made well
before the acquisition of the Claimant’s land. Schools and colleges existed
well before the acquisition of the Claimant’s land at Velachery. After formation of
bye pass roads, since the claimant land was acquired and hence the acquired land
was surrounded by wide road that further enhanced market price apart from all
further development made before acquisition of the claimant land.

10] It is respectfully submitted that as on the date of acquisition proposal

made in the year 2003 the market value of the land was Rs.3000/- per Sq.ft., and
when the Award was made to the claimant’s acquired land very belatedly in the
year 2009 with total unmindfully fixed at the rate of 102/- per Sq.ft., in highly
arbitrary manner, when the value of the land Velachery was Rs.5000/- per Sq.ft.,.
Though the registered sale deed reveal lesser value, the monthly rental value
 9

prevailed at the time of proposal for acquisition was much high at the rate of
Rs.25/- per Sq.ft., for residential area and Rs.50 to 100/- per Sq.ft., for commercial
area proving the higher cost of the land.

11] It is respectfully submitted that as per reported Supreme Court

Judgment in 2004 (2) SCC page 283, 15% yearly appreciation can be added. In
the instant case 100 % escalation cost can be awarded in as much the acquired
land situated within the Chennai metro city within the jurisdiction of Corporation
of Chennai and State headquarters. Independent house site cannot be possible to
acquire and hence only residential apartment is being developed to meet the scarce
of independent and separate land. As per reported Supreme Court judgment in
2012 (5) SCC page 432 in the case of Mahrawal Khewaji Trust (Registered)
Faridkot and others –Vs- State of Punjab and Others, the highest sale price
nearing to 3 (A) notification can be fixed. As per reported judgment in 2006
AIR SC 447 stating in Para 2 and 4 of the above judgment that equal
compensation was awarded to 5 Villages having more or less similar nature
and character and well connected by Roads, hence the entire Velachery can be
considered as one Village for determining compensation. As per recent Supreme
Court Judgment the highest sale value can be nearing to the notification for
proposal for acquisition shall be taken in to consideration for fixing quantum
of compensation.

12] It is submitted that as per Section 19 and 20 of Tamil Nadu State

Highways Act 2001 for granting statutory benefits the Land Acquisition Act 1894
will apply in awarding addition market value of 12 %, solatium of 30% and
interest to the enhanced compensation by the reference court to the totaled sum of
Enhanced compensation plus 12% additional market value plus 30% of enhanced
compensation and award interest to over all the entire aggregated sum as 9 % per
annum for the one year and thereafter 15 % per annum till the date of the deposit of
the entire enhanced compensation to the credit of L.A.O.P. No: 5 of 2018.

13] It is submitted that as per section 20 (F)(2) of Railways Act 1989, the
competent authority shall make an award within 1 year from the date of declaration
 10

the entire acquisition proceedings shall be lapsed. For the reasons recorded if any
delay caused to pass an award there is an extension of time of 6 months with
additional compensation at the rate of not less than 5% of the value of the award
for every month of delay. Such a beneficial legislation to the belatedly passing the
Award is totally absent in the Tamil Nadu Highways Act 2001. Hence appropriate
relief must be given for belatedly passing the award by way of awarding additional
compensation for the delay of 7 years.

14] It is submitted that in determining compensation the Collector shall be

guided as per Section 23 and 24 and other relevant provision of land Acquisition
Act 1894. The land acquisition Officer had not followed the above said procedure.
As per section 19 (3) of Tamil Highways Act 2001 the Government shall refer to
the collector for the determination of Compensation in case of failure to reach
agreement for fixing market value on the part of the land losers. As per section 19
(11) of Tamil Highways Act 2001 the Collector shall dispose the matter of
determination of compensation within 6 months from the date of such reference.
But in the instant case after declaration made under Section 15 (1) Tamil Highways
Act 2001 on 08.09.2004 there was a lapse of more than 6 years delay to pass award
in fixing quantum of compensation apart from making delay in disbursement of
award amount. The Government cannot discriminate land losers under the guise of
acquisition under different laws. Since the purpose is loss of land from the land
owner who must be compensated appropriately in appropriate time. Therefore the
reasonable additional compensation may be given by this reference court for
making delay of 6 years in passing award itself.

15] It is submitted that in the batch of LAOP cases in LAOP Nos.

17/2014, 21/2014, 25/2014, 36/2014, 40/2014, 42/2014, 57/2014, 64/2014 and
71/2012, this Hon’ble reference court was please to enhance the compensation
from Rs.102/- per Sq.ft., to Rs.2000/- per Sq.ft., to the land acquired at Velachery
in the year 2003, though the actual market value priviled as Rs.5000/- per Sq.ft., as
on the date of notification.

16] The Land Acquisition officer has not awarded any compensation
award amount for the proportionate loss of the land in common area and pathway
 11

applicable to the property acquired from the claimant along with adjacent land
from the land loosers. As per law laid down by the Apex Court, the Claimant is
eligible to receive and the land acquisition officer is liable to pay the above said
compensation based on Market Value to be fixed by the Reference Court.

It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to enhance the
compensation for a sum of Rs.5000/- per Sq.ft., with statutory benefit available
under central Act as per section 23 of Land Acquisition Act 1894, as per section 23
(1) (A) Land Acquisition Act 1894.

(A) Award additional Market value of 12% per annum from the date of
proposal for acquisition made on 18.12.2003 under Section 15 (2) of Tamil Nadu
State Highways Act 2001 to the date of Award in Award No.2/2009 dated
21.10.2009 or to the date of taking possession of the land whichever is earlier,

(B) Award Solatium of 30% of market value of the land fixed by the
reference Court as per Sec 23[2] of Land Acquisition Act 1894,

(C) Award interest 9% per annum for the period of 1 year from the date of
possession to the entire sum-up award amount of market value + Additional market
value + Solatium and award interest at the rate of 15% per annum after expiry of
the above said 1 year, till the date of deposit of enhanced compensation as per
Section 28 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 in view of Section 19 (6) of Tamil nadu
highways Act.

(D) and Award cost and thus render justice.

Date at Chennai this 12th day of December, 2018.

Claimant
Counsel for Claimant
 12

VERIFICATION

I, Radhakalyan, D/o.S.N.Mahadevan, aged about years and residing at

N.503. Sreeram Samruddhi, Varathur Road, Thoobarahalli, Bangalore, Karnataka -
560 066 the Claimant above named do hereby declare that what is stated in para 1
to 15 are true to the best of my knowledge and belief of my information and I
believe the same to be true.

Date at Chennai this 12th day of December, 2018

Claimant

LIST OF DOCUMENTS
Sl. Date Discretion Remark
No.
1 22.02.2002 Registered sale deed executed vide Document No: 783/2002 Xerox
Copy
2 18.11.2002 Registered sale deed executed vide Document No: Xerox
Copy
4856/2002.

Date at Chennai this 12th day of December, 2018

Claimant

Counsel for Claimant

13

IN THE COURT OF VI ASST

– CITY CIVIL JUDGE,
CHENNAI

L.A.O.P No : 5 of 2018

Mrs.Radhakalyan,
…Claimant
Vs.
The District Collector- Cum –
Land Acquisition Officer,
Southern Sector of Inner Road
Scheme, Phase II, Collector
Office, Singaravellar Maligai,
Chennai – 600 001 and another.
…Respondents

CLAIM PETITION FILED

BY THE CLAIMANT

M/s. K.M.VENUGOPAL,(770/81)
E.PARAMASIVAN,(954/2008)
Counsel for the Claimant
67.Law Chamber, high Court
Buildings, Chennai – 104
9381035478, 9940792157