IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE TUESDAY, THE 23RD SEPTEMBER 2008 / 1ST ASWINA 1930 LA.App..No. 671 of 2007() ------------------------- LAR.28/2003 of SUB COURT, PAYYANNUR .................... APPELLANT: RESPONDENT NO.1 ------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) NH, KANNUR. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LATHA T.THANKAPPAN RESPONDENTS: CLAIMANT : RESPONDENT NO.2: ----------------------------- 1. MADAYI PUTHIYA VEETTIL LAXSHMANAN, 'ANAND', TRICHAMBARAM DESOM, TALIPARAMBA AMSOM, TALIPARAMBA P.O. 2. THE PROJECT OFFICER, OECF, PROJECTS, K.W.A., KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.K.V.PAVITHRAN FOR R1 SRI.JAYANANDAN MADAYI PUTHIYAVEETTIL FOR R1 SRI.BABU VARGHESE, SC, KWA FOR R2 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/09/2008 ALONG WITH LAA NO. 824 OF 2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON I.A.NO.1865 OF 2007 IN LAA NO.671 OF 2007 DISMISSED 23.9.2008 SD/- PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.Nos.671 & 824 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 23rd September, 2008 JUDGMENT These appeals arise from a common judgment passed in two land acquisition references by the Subordinate Judge's Court, Payyannur. The acquisitions were pursuant to a notification under Section 4(1) dated 28.3.1998. The purpose of the acquisition was establishment of Pattuvam water supply scheme of the Kerala Water Authority. The properties were situated in Taliparamba village within the limits of Taliparamba Municipality and obviously near to the commercial heart-land of the municipal town. The land acquisition officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.6192/- per cent. The evidence before the court consisted of Exts.A1 and A2 on the side of the claimant apart from the oral testimony of A.W.1, the claimant and Exts.B1 to B6 on the side of the Government. This was in addition to Ext.C1 Commissioner's report. Ext.A1 was a document executed on 15.1.1996 in respect of the property situated near to the acquired property and the same revealed a land value of Rs.42,828/- per cent. Ext.A2 was a post notification document executed on 7.8.1998 and the same revealed a land value of Rs.Two lakhs per cent. The Commissioner had inspected the acquired property as well as LAA Nos.671 & 824/07 - 2 - properties covered by Exts.A1 and A2. The Commissioner had recommended refixation of land value at the rate of Rs.40,000/- per cent. What the learned Subordinate Judge did was to place partial reliance on Ext.A1 and Ext.C1 Commissioner's report and hold that the market value which would have been paid for the acquired property by a willing purchaser to a willing seller is Rs.25,000/- per cent and to answer the references accordingly. 2. Heard Smt.Latha T.Thankappan, Senior Government Pleader on behalf of the appellant and Mr.Babu Varghese, Standing Counsel for the Kerala Water Authority. 3. Though the learned Government Pleader would strongly assail the award of the reference court, I am of the view that the learned Subordinate Judge had kept in mind the relevant parameters to be applied when the market value of lands acquired under the provisions of the land acquisition act are valued. In my opinion, the reliance placed on Ext.C1 and Exts.A1 and A2 was justified. It is a correct evaluation of market value of the acquired properties that has been made by the learned Judge. Any evaluation of the market value of the acquired properties to a certain extent will involve guess work. Even if it can be said that the determination of market value of LAA Nos.671 & 824/07 - 3 - Rs.25,000/- per cent is the result of guess work, in my opinion, is a good guess that has been made by the learned Subordinate Judge. I do not find any warrant for interference. Both the appeals fail and the same will stand dismissed. The parties are directed to suffer their costs in this appeal. srd PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE