IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2010 / 29TH ASHADHA 1932 LA.App..No. 285 of 2002(A) ------------------------- LAR.52/1997 of SUB COURT, SULTHAN BATHERY .................... APPELLANT(S)/CLAIMANT: ----------------------- SRI.ANANCHALIL MATHEW, S/O. JOSEPH, AGED 58 YEARS, ANANCHALIL HOUSE, KAVUMANNAM P.O., VYTHIRI TALUK, POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER OF 1. MOONNUTHOTTIYIL ANNA, -DO- -DO- 2. MARY, -DO- -DO- 3. JOHN, -DO- -DO- (DIED) 4. GEORGE, -DO- -DO- 5. THRESSIYA, -DO- -DO- 6. ALPHONSA, THARIODE P.O. *ADDL.APPELLANTS 7 TO 10: 7. MARY, W/O. LATE SRI.JOHN, MOONNUTHOTTIYIL HOUSE, THARIYODE P.O. VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT. 8. SIBI JOHN, S/O.LATE JOHN, AGED 34 YEARS, MOONNUTHOTTIYIL HOUSE, THARIYODE P.O., VYTHIRI TALULK, WAYANAD DISTRICT. 9. DINISHA JOHN D/O.LATE JOHN, AGED 32 YEARS, MOONNUTHOTTIYIL HOUSE, THARIYODE P.O., VYTHIRI TALULK, WAYANAD DISTRICT. 10. VINEETHA JOHN, D/O.LATE JOHN, AGED 29 YEARS, MOONNUTHOTTIYIL HOUSE, THARIYODE P.O., VYTHIRI TALULK, WAYANAD DISTRICT. (* ADDL.7 TO 9 IMPLEADED AS THE LRS OF APPELLANT NO.3 VIDE ORDER DT.16.6.10 IN I.A.1935/10) BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP MATHEW SRI.G.G.MANOJ (...2) LAA.285/02 2 RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS. --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WAYANAD. 2. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), THARIODE P.O. SR.GOVT. PLEADER SMT.LATHA T.THANKAPPAN THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ---------------------------------- L.A.A. No.285 of 2002 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Abdul Rehim,J. An extent of 22.23 cents of property in Thariode Village of Vythiri Taluk was acquired for the purpose of Kuttiadi Augmentation Scheme. The date of publication of Section 4(1) notification was 15.5.1994. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation adopting capitalisation method. The acquired property contained 86 yielding coffee trees and 5 pepper wines, apart from 3 cardamom plants. A total amount of Rs.48,067/- was awarded by the L.A. Officer. 2. Before the reference court the appellant contended that the quantum of yield assessed was very low. The rate of price adopted by the Land Acquisition Officer with respect to coffee was disputed. Ext.A1 is the copy of a certificate produced by the appellant which revealed that the Deputy Director of Coffee Board, Kalpetta had certified that the price rate of coffee during 1993-94 was Rs.73.17/- per Kg. But the reference court discarded the evidence relying on another judgment wherein original of Ext.A1 certificate was produced, observing that the certificate is not reliable for want of non- L.A.A.285/2002 2 availability of materials based on which it was issued. It is revealed from Ext.R2, K.C.T.I. Statement, that the L.A. Officer has adopted multiplier as 10 for arriving the capitalisation value. Even though it was contended that the multiplier should be fixed as 15, the reference court has not accepted such contention placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana Vs. Gurcharan Singh & another (AIR 1996 SC 106). Therefore the reference was answered on the negative and no enhancement was granted. 3. Sri. Philip Mathew, learned counsel for the appellant/claimant contended that the reference court went highly erred in discarding Ext.A1 certificate. According to him, Coffee Board is the statutory body dealing in coffee products and the price rate certificates issued by such authority is authentic as far as the value prevailed during the relevant time. Learned counsel for the appellant placed reliance on the decision of this court in LAA.No.247/2000 to contend that with respect to coffee plantation in the District of Wayanad, considering the special circumstances, adoption of multiplier at 10 is highly inadequate. We notice that, in the said decision this court observed that considering the special L.A.A.285/2002 3 circumstances prevailing in Wayanad like the higher rate of fertility and yielding, multiplier of 12 can be adopted, despite findings contained in the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 4. Considering the totality of circumstances, we are inclined to uphold the contention regarding the rate of multiplier, which we accept as 12. Even though the appellant placed reliance on Ext.A1 certificate showing price rate at Rs.73.17 per Kg, Smt. Latha T.Thankappan, learned Government Pleader pointed out that Ext.A1 shows the price rate of the year 1993-94 only, whereas the date of notification is 15.5.1994 pertaining to financial year 1994-95. But we notice that the claimant had given oral evidence as AW1 about the value of coffee prevailed during the relevant period, and there is no cross-examination on this aspect. Therefore we are inclined to adopt the value of coffee at the rate of Rs.60/- per Kg. 5. Calculated on the above basis, capitalised value with respect to coffee plants need be enhanced by Rs.9,288/- which we round off to Rs.9,500/-. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed enhancing the total compensation awarded by a further sum of Rs.9,500/-. L.A.A.285/2002 4 The appellant/claimant will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Sections 23(1A), 23(2) and Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act on the enhanced compensation to which he becomes eligible by virtue of this judgment and he will also be entitled to proportionate cost in the appeal. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb