Page 1

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                  CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.5930-5931 OF 2010

            RADHA KRISHNACHETTY & ANR.   ... APPELLANT(S)  

               VS.    SPL.TAHSILDAR LAQ & ANR.  ... RESPONDENT(S)

       J U D G M E N T     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.

1

Page 2

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.

       ..............J.  [ANIL R. DAVE]  

.................J. [ADARSH KUMAR GOEL]

New Delhi; 4th February, 2016.

2