IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST OCTOBER 2009 / 29TH ASWINA 1931 LA.App..No. 368 of 2007() ------------------------- LAR.205/1997 of ADDL.SUB COURT,KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT: RESPONDENT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER P.N.SUMANGALA RESPONDENT: CLAIMANT ----------------------- BHASURANGI, PALAZHI VEEDU, MANGADU VILLAGE, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ----------------------------------------- LA.A.No.368 of 2007 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 21st day of October, 2009 JUDGMENT PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J. The Government is in appeal. The property under acquisition is in Mangad Village of Kollam District. The acquisition was for the formation of National Highway Bye-pass. Relevant Section 4(1) notification was published on 11/11/1992. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded the land value at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per Are. Ext.A1 sale deed was the main item of tangible evidence produced by the claimants. The time lag between the transfer under Ext.A1 and the notification was nearly 4 years. It revealed that the property has been purchased at the rate of Rs.7,250/- per cent. The court below has specifically found under the impugned judgment that Ext.A1 property was superior property. However no deduction was made by the learned subordinate Judge on the value reflected on Ext.A1, on account of the superiority of Ext.A1 property over the acquired property. Granting addition for passage of time, the land value is refixed at the rate of Rs.22,230/- per Are. The LA.A.No.368 of 2007 2 property in Ext.A1 was in a panchayat area. We follow the Supreme Court decision in G.M.Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Vs Jeevanbai Patel & another (2008 SAR (Civil)894) and deduct at the rate of 7.5 per cent for the 4 years time which is passed. The amount will come to Rs.22,300/- which will be the correct value of the property covered by Ext.A1 as on the date of acquisition as found by the reference court. The property under acquisition cannot be granted same value. At least 30 % cut has to be made. Making such deduction, the value of the land in acquisition will have to be properly refixed at the rate of Rs.17,000/- per cent. It is accordingly done. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. But it is made clear that the claimant/respondent will be entitled to all statutory benefits under sections 23(1A), 23 (2) & 28 of the L.A. Act. Parties are directed to suffer their costs. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE skj. In the judgment dated 21/10/2009 in L.A.A368/2007, the words and figure “Rs.17,000/- per cent” occurring in the 11th line of page 2 are corrected and substituted as `15,561/- per Are” and the figure “Rs.22,300/-” occurring in 6th line of page 2 is corrected and substituted as “`22,300/- per Are”. vide order dated 27/06/2012 in I.A.754/2012 in L.A.A.368/2007. Sd/- Registrar (Judicial)