IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE THURSDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2008 / 16TH SRAVANA 1930 LA.App..No. 752 of 2006() ------------------------- LAR.128/1998 of ADDL.SUB COURT,KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT: CLAIMANT ------------------- K.MANOHARAN, VILLUAMANGALATH VEEDU, THRIKKADAVOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.UNNIKRISHNAN (KOLLAM) SRI.S.HARIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT:RESPONDENT: ------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LATHA T.THANKAPPAN THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/08/2008 ALONG WITH LAA NO.837 OF 2006 & LAA NO. 47 OF 2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.Nos.752 & 837 of 2006 and L.A.A.No.47 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 7th August, 2008 JUDGMENT All these appeals have been filed by the respective claimants in a common judgment passed by the Subordinate Judge's Court, Kollam in LAR Nos.128/98, 145/98 & 135/98. The acquisition was pursuant to a notification under Section 4(1) dated 19.7.1996 for the construction of National Highway by-pass. The properties were situated within the limits of Thrikkadavoor Panchayat said to be only 5 K.M. away from the Kollam Municipal Corporation. The Land Acquisition Officer relying on the basis document, would award the land value at the rate of Rs.35,405/- per Are for the properties covered in LAR Nos.128/98 & 145/98. For the properties involved in LAR No.135/98, the Land Acquisition Officer awarded the land value at the rate of Rs.49,003/- per Are. The reference court relying on Exts.A1 and A2 documents would refix the land value for the properties in LAR No.128/98 (covered by LAA No.752/06) and LAR No.145/98 (covered by LAA No.837/06) at Rs.40,000/- per Are. Regarding the properties involved in LAR No.135/98 (covered by LAA No.47/07) the reference court would endorse the view of the Land LAA No.752/06 etc. - 2 - Acquisition Officer that the said property was superior to the properties involved in other cases and would refix the land value at Rs.60,000/- per Are. 2. The ground which is prominently raised in these appeals is that the court below committed a mistake of misreading Exts.A1 and A2. 3. I have heard the submissions of Mr.C.Unnikrishnan, counsel for the appellants and Smt.Latha Thankappan, Senior Government Pleader on behalf of the respondents. 4. Mr.Unnikrishnan drew my attention to Exts.A1 and A2 and submitted that those documents pertain to 5 cents of land each only and not 10 cents of land as wrongly read by the learned Subordinate Judge. 5. The Government Pleader would submit that Exts.A1 and A2 were not properly proved before the court below. Nobody connected with the execution of those two documents were examined. P.Ws.1 and 2, the claimants did not give any responsible evidence regarding the correctness of the market value seen paid as per Exts.A1 and A2. 6. Under the impugned common judgment the court below has accepted Exts.A1 and A2 as revealing bona fide transactions of sale of LAA No.752/06 etc. - 3 - comparable property. It has been found specifically that Exts.A1 and A2 properties were exactly similar to the properties involved in LAR Nos.128/98 & 145/98. That finding is entered by the learned Subordinate Judge relying on the testimony of A.Ws.1 and 2. It was noticed by the court that there was no serious cross examination on P.Ws.1 and 2 on their evidence that Exts.A1 and A2 documents are bona fide transactions of sale of comparable properties. The Government has not preferred any appeal nor has filed cross objections with regard to the above finding. The finding of the court below that the properties in Exts.A1 and A2 were comparable to the properties involved in LAR Nos.128/98 and 145/98 cannot be assailed now by the Government. 7. Having reappreciated the evidence particularly Exts.A1 and A2 and the testimonies of P.Ws.1 and 2, I have no difficulty to accept the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants that the reference court committed mistake while appreciating Exts.A1 and A2. Exts.A1 and A2 pertain to 5 cents each of land only. Thus, if Exts.A1 and A2 were to be followed correctly, the land value should have been refixed at the rate of Rs.30,000/- per cent (corresponding to Rs.75,000/- per Are). According to the Land Acquisition Officer, the LAA No.752/06 etc. - 4 - ratio between the values of the property which are subject matter of LAR Nos.128/98 and 145/98 and the property which is the subject matter of LAR No.135/98 is Rs.35,405/- : Rs.49,003/- per Are. Following that ratio, the market value of the properties involved in LAR No.135/98 (covered by LAA No.47/07) should be refixed at Rs.1,05,000/- per Are. 8. The result of the above discussion is that the appeals are allowed to the following extent: The judgments and decrees passed by the reference court are set aside and in modification, the land value of the properties involved in LAR No.128/98 (covered by LAA No.752/06) and LAR No.145/98 (covered by LAA No.837/06) is refixed at Rs.75,000/- per Are and the land value of the properties involved in LAR No.135/98 (covered by LAA No.47/07) is refixed at Rs.1,05,000/- per Are. It is needless to mention that the parties will be entitled to all statutory benefits on the enhanced land value including solatium, interest at the statutory rates and also the amounts due under Section 23(1A). The parties are directed to suffer their costs through out. srd PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE LAA No.752/06 etc. - 5 -