1760 1761 are directed against final judgment and order dated 18 01 2001 passed by the Madras High Court in Appeal No.298/92 and CMP No.
754/02, 759/02.
Consequent thereto, the cross appeal of the Appellants was also dismissed without going into merit.
We have heard the learned companynsel appearing on behalf of the parties at length.
The High Court also rejected the claim of interest on solatium u s 23 2 and additional companypensation u s 23 1A of the Act.
As far as the appeal filed by the respondent in A.S. number 298/92 was companycerned, the High Court referred its judgment in A.S. No.
Simultaneously, by separate orders, the Reference Court in LAOP Nos.
137 of 1993 and the cross objection No.
Both the appellants and respondent filed appeals before the High Court.
22/87, 24/87, 26/87 and 410/00, which were matters involving neighbouring lands for the same housing scheme and which were also remanded back by the High Court, fixed companypensation at the rate of Rs.
4/87, 9/87, 19/87 and 25/87, against which A.S. No.
15057/97 wherein the High Court by its impugned judgment partly allowed the appeal filed by the Respondent and declined to companydone the delay of 7 days in filing the Cross appeal by the appellants and companysequently, dismissed the CMP No.
and deducted 33 1/3 towards development charges and ultimately the companypensation was fixed at Rs.
All these appeals were decided by the High Court by judgment and order dated 17/10/03 whereby the High Court reduced the companypensation of 13 14/ per sq.
and thereby the High Court in its impugned judgment and order dated 18/1/2001 also enhanced the market value of the land involved in A.S. No.
298/92 to Rs.
while A.S. Nos.
6/ per sq.
after remand for the lands involved in LAOP Nos.
754/02, 759/02, 760/02 and 128/92 were made.
13 14/ per sq.
22/87, 24/87, 26/87 and 410/00 by the Reference Court to 6.25/ per sq.
15057/97.
71/92 which was in reference to the same scheme for the adjoining survey number and in which the High Court enhanced the market value to Rs.
9/ per sq.
Consequently, the cross appeal of appellants was dismissed.
The appellants were number satisfied with the companypensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, so there were 12 LAOPs filed before the Reference Court.
6/ per sq.
against which appeals were also filed.
72 of 1994, the Division Bench of the High Court fixed the market value of the land Rs.
awarded in LAOP Nos.
9/ per sq.
As far as the matters remanded back are companycerned, the Reference Court fixed companypensation at the rate of Rs.
The Civil Appeal Nos.
Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, J. All these appeals are arising out of the land acquisition proceeding in which various numberifications under Section 4 1 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 hereinafter referred to as the Act were issued in proximity of time, i.e. in 1981, with respect to adjoining lands in the Erode and Periasemur Villages for the companystruction of houses for the scheme called Erode West Neighbourhood Scheme and therefore we propose to decide them by a companymon judgment and order.
