IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 24TH OCTOBER 2011 / 2ND KARTHIKA 1933 LA.App..No. 1174 of 2010() -------------------------- LAR.3/2006 of SUB COURT, HOSDRUG .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANTS ----------------------- 1. B.K.MOIDU, BEKAL KAMAM PALAM, PALLIKKARA VILLAGE. 2. UMMALIMMA, W/O. B.K.MOIDU, PALLIKKARA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER SMT.K.A.SANJEETHA SRI.ANEESH JOSEPH SMT.C.J.AJITHA RESPONDENT(S): REFERRING OFFICER/SUPPL. RESPONDENTS --------------------------------------------------- 1. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LAND ACQUISITION (RAILWAY), KASARAGOD. 2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER(CONSTRUCTION), SOUTHERN RAILWAY, KANNUR. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KASARAGOD. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ROSE MICHAEL FOR R1 & 3 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.No. 1174 OF 2010 ------------------------ Dated this the 24th day of October, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The claimants are in appeal challenging the judgment of the Reference Court by which the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer is confirmed. The appellants had a claim for land value as well as for more value for structures. The only structure which, according to the advocate commissioner deputed by the Reference Court, existed on the property under acquisition was a compound wall. For this compound wall, the Land Acquisition Officer had awarded total value of Rs.3718/- . The learned Subordinate Judge did not accept the commissioner's recommendations for higher value. We feel that the commissioner's recommendations could have been accepted to a certain extent and the court below could have awarded Rs.2,500/- more towards the value of the structure. Hence, we award to the appellants Rs.2,500/- more than what was awarded by the LAO towards the structure value. 2. Now we come to the question of value to be fixed for LAA.No.1174/2010 2 the land in question. The learned Subordinate Judge did not award any enhancement in land value as the appellants had not produced any document reflecting a higher land value than what was fixed by the LAO Judge in its award.(In fact we find that it was not the method of land value which was adopted by the LAO. The LAO adopted the method of capitalisation of income as that method was found to be more advantageous to the claimants). 3. In this court, the appellants have produced certified copy of the document No.1790/2002 of the Sub Registry, Uduma. Sri.Aneesh Joseph, learned counsel for the claimants requested that the above document be received in evidence and the appeal be allowed and the market value of the land be refixed relying on the same. 4. This request is opposed by Smt. Rose Michael learned Government Pleader. According to her, no justifiable excuse is offered by the appellants for not producing document No.1790/2002 earlier. It is quite possible that the document does not pertain to the property comparable to the property under acquisition. Prejudice will be caused to the Government if LAA.No.1174/2010 3 that document is produced at the appellate stage, so submits the learned Government Pleader. 5. Having anxiously considered the rival submissions addressed at the Bar, we feel that the issue regarding the correct market value of the property under acquisition can be remanded to the Reference Court and the appellants can be permitted to produce the document (Document No.1790/2002 of the SRO, Uduma) subject to conditions. 6. The result of the above discussion is as follows; 7. The appellants/claimants are awarded a sum of Rs.2,500/- more as additional value for all the structures which existed on the property. The issue of fixing the market value of the land under acquisition is remanded to the Reference Court. The appellants are permitted to produce document No.1790/2002 of the SRO, Uduma before the Reference Court and to prove the same in accordance with law subject to the following conditions; i). The one third court fee remitted on the appeal memorandum will be forfeited by the appellants. ii). The appellants shall pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- to the LAA.No.1174/2010 4 Government through the office of the Advocate General within three weeks of receiving a copy of this judgment. iii). In case the appellants become eligible for more compensation towards land value under the revised award to be passed by the Reference Court, such enhanced compensation will not carry interest otherwise admissible under section 28 of the Act during the period from 22/6/2010 till the date of the revised award to be passed by the Reference Court. The parties are directed to appear before the Reference Court on 9/11/2011. It is needless to mention that if the appellants adduce further evidence before the Reference Court, the Government will also be permitted to adduce counter evidence. The learned Subordinate Judge will pass revised award on the basis of the entirety of the evidence comes on record. The Registry will not refund the court fee so far remitted on the appeal memorandum. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE. dpk LAA.No.1174/2010 5