IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH AUGUST 2008 / 5TH BHADRA 1930 LA.App..No. 493 of 2005() ------------------------- LAR.51/2003 of III ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT: RESPONDENT NO.1: ---------------------- STATE OF KERALA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. NOBLE MATHEW RESPONDENTS: CLAIMANTS & RESPONDENT NO.2: ---------------------- 1. SMT.ELSY MATHEW, W/O. LATE MATHEW, THENAMPARAMBIL, KARSHAKA ROAD, ERNAKULAM. 2. SMT. ANNIE. T.M., D/O. LATE MATHEW, THENAMPARAMBIL, KARASHAKA ROAD, ERNAKULAM. 3. SRI. SABU T.M., S/O. LATE MATHEW, THENAMPARAMBIL, KARSHAKA ROAD, ERNAKULAM. 4. SMT.RITA T.M., D/O. LATE MATHEW, THENAMPARAMBIL, KARSHAKA ROAD, ERNAKULAM. 5. SMT.MARYKUTTY T.M., D/O. LATE MATHEW, THENAMPARAMBIL, KARSHAKA ROAD, ERNAKULAM. 6. THE SECRETARY, GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM. BY ADVS. SRI.S.B.PREMACHANDRA PRABHU FOR R6 SRI.JAYSON GEORGE FOR R6 SRI.ALEX ANTONY SEBASTIAN P.A. FOR R6 SRI.P.K.ABOOBACKER(EDAPPALLY) FOR R1 TO R5 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP ADMISSION ON 27/08/2008 ALONG WITH LAA NO. 1523 OF 2005, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------------------- L.A.A.NOS.493 & 1523 OF 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT Harun-Ul-Rashid, J. The State of Kerala is the appellant in both these appeals. The appeals are directed against the judgment and decree in L.A.R. Nos. 51 of 2003 and 104 of 2003 respectively on the file of the III Additional Sub Court, Ernakulam. The extent of property involved is 2.05 Ares in L.A.R. No.51 of 2003 and 0.22 Ares in L.A.R. No.104 of 2003 of Ernakulam Village, Kanayannur Taluk. Acquisition is for the purpose of providing entry to Ernakulam South Railway Station from the eastern side, a scheme sponsored by the Greater Cochin Development Authority. Section 4(1) notification in both the cases is dated 20.8.1999. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed land value at the rate of Rs.1,00,000/- per cent as against a claim of Rs.5,00,000/- per cent. On reference, the court below refixed the land value at Rs.1,50,000/- per cent. Hence, these appeals. 2. It is an admitted fact that the property is situated in an important locality in the city near South Railway Station. There are a number of L.A.A.NOS.493 & 1523/2005 2 Government Offices, hospitals and other public and private institutions near the acquired land. The claimants as well as the respondents adduced evidence, both oral and documentary. Ext.A1 sale deed was relied on by the claimants in support of their claim for enhanced compensation. It has come out in evidence that the property covered by Ext.A1 is located in a more important locality in the city and is facing the main road and, therefore, there cannot be any comparison between the said property and the acquired land. It was correctly observed by the reference court also. At the same time, the reference court examined the question in the background of the locational importance of the property. In paragraph 11 of the judgment in L.A.R. No.51 of 2003, the reference court has discussed the locational importance and potential value of the property and the time gap of two years between the date of execution of the basic document and Section 4(1) notification and rightly held that the awarding officer failed to give any increase for the time gap which the claimants are entitled to get. The reference court also relied on the decision of the Supreme Court reported in Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Sahaswan v. Bipin Kumar (2004)2 S.C.C. 283 and held that the claimants are entitled to get 15% increase in each year. Accordingly, the reference court fixed land value at the rate of Rs.1,50,000/- per cent. For the reasons stated and the evidence discussed, we are of the view that the land value fixed by the reference L.A.A.NOS.493 & 1523/2005 3 court is just, proper and reasonable and we find no reason to interfere with the same. The appeal is devoid of merits and it is accordingly dismissed. I.A. No.1356 of 2005 in L.A.A. No.493 of 2005 and I.A. No.4142 of 2005 in L.A.A. No. 1523 of 2005 are also dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. (KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE) (HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) sp/ L.A.A.NOS.493 & 1523/2005 4 KURIAN JOSEPH & HAURN-UL-RASHID, JJ. L.A.A.NOS.493 &1523/2005 JUDGMENT 27th August, 2008 L.A.A.NOS.493 & 1523/2005 5