IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2010 / 15TH ASHADHA 1932 LA.App..No. 1462 of 2007(A) --------------------------------- LAR.518/1997 of PRL.SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT --------------------------------- THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), KOZHIKODE. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.R.BINDU RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS ---------------------------------- 1. PADANNAPURATH PUTHANAYIL THRILOKAN, KIZHAKKEDATH HOUSE, P.O.ERANHIKKAL, ELATHUR VILLAGE, KOZHIKODE. 2. PADANNAPPURATH THRIDEEP, KIZHEKKEDATH KARANNUR OF ELATHUR VILLAGE, KOZHIKODE. ADV. SMT.PRABHA R.MENON FOR R1,2 SRI.M.KRISHNAKUMAR FOR R1,2 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/07/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.1462 of 2007 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 6th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J The Government is in appeal. The property under acquisition was in Elathur village of Kozhikode Thaluk. The acquisition was pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 14/02/1994. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.10,374/- per cent. The Reference Court relying mainly on Ext.A2 document would re-fix the land value at Rs.30,000/- per cent. That court also awarded a further amount of Rs.15,000/- to the claimant as compensation for injurious affection for the un-acquired portion. In L. A. A. No.1462 of 2007 -2- this appeal, various grounds have been raised assailing the enhancement granted by the court below. Smt.R.Bindu, the learned Government Pleader addressed arguments based on those grounds. Smt.Prabha R. Menon, the learned counsel for the claimant however would support the impugned judgment on the various reasons stated in the judgment itself. 2. We are unable to approve the action of the learned Subordinate Judge in having relying on Ext.A2, a post notification document for granting enhancement to the claimant. At the same time, we notice our own judgments in various other cases pertaining to acquisition of land in the same village itself at more or less the same time for the construction of Calicut byepass. Keeping in mind L. A. A. No.1462 of 2007 -3- those judgment, we feel that the market value of the land re-fixed by the learned Judge is slightly on the higher side. We modify the impugned judgment to the extent of re-fixing the market value at Rs.27,500/- per cent. As for the award of Rs.15,000/- towards compensation for severance towards the unacquired portion, we feel that the learned Subordinate Judge was justified in awarding so much of amount. Ext.A1 shows that at least half cent of the property that remained unacquired has become practically waste. Hence, the appeal will stand allowed only to the extent of re-fixing the market value of land at Rs.27,500/- per cent. In all other respects, the impugned judgment is confirmed. 3. It is needless to mention that the claimant L. A. A. No.1462 of 2007 -4- will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Sections 23(2), 23(1A) and under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act. It is clarified that the sum of Rs.15,000/- awarded as compensation for injurious affection will not carry the benefit under Section 23(2) and 23(1A). It will carry only the benefit under Section 28. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE C. K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE kns/-