IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 13TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 22ND KARTHIKA 1930 LA.App..No. 633 of 1998(A) -------------------------- ( LAR.180/1993 of SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA ) APPELLANT/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA. BY ADVOCATE GENERAL BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. SHRI MOHAMMED ANZAR. RESPONDENT/CLAIMANT: --------------------------- PARAMESWARAN PILLAI, OPP. KALLUPALAM, KADAVANTHRA, COCHIN -20, FROM THONDALIL THARAMEL, KOTTARACAV, MAVELIKKARA. R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.P.SREEKRISHNAN ADV. SMT.SHAHNA KARTHIKEYAN THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & K.T. SANKARAN, JJ. .................................................. L.A.A. No. 633 OF 1998 ................................................... Dated this the 13th November, 2008 J U D G M E N T Kurian Joseph, J: This Appeal is filed by the State challenging the judgment of the Reference Court, viz., Sub Court, Mavelikkara in L.A.R.No. 180 of 1993. Acquisition is for the purpose of construction of an approach road to Pullamplavu bridge. Section 4(1) notification is dated 02.07.1991. The land acquisition officer fixed the land value at Rs. 723.71 per Are. Based on the documents dated 17.12.1990, the claimant had raised a claim for Rs. 50,000/- per cent . The total extent involved is 4.60 Ares of wet land . The claimant had also a case for injurious affection. According to the claimant, owing to the construction of the approach road, his access to the main road has been cut off, since there is level difference between the road and the remaining property. The Reference Court, on the basis of the evidence available on record found that the acquired property cannot be treated as a simple water logged puncha land, but at the same it cannot be treated as similar to Ext.A1 dry land. The court below also found that the acquired property is situated on the side of the Mavelikkara -Krishnapuram road and that area is having commercial and industrial importance since the railway L.A.A. No. 633 OF 1998 2 station is at a distance of two furlong and court building, hospitals , power house etc are located within a distance of hundred metres from the acquired property. In view of the evidence available on record and particularly taking note of the importance of the locality, by permissible guess work, the Reference Court fixed the land value at Rs. 15,000/- per Are. 2. Having regard to the reasoning adopted by the Reference Court based on evidence, it cannot be said that the land value fixed by the Reference Court, in any way, is unreasonable. For the purpose of meeting the expense towards developing the land to the height of the road constructed in the acquired property, an amount of Rs.40,000/- was awarded by the Reference Court for reclaiming the remaining land. It cannot also be said to be in any way unreasonable. For the reasons stated above, we do not find any merit in the appeal and accordingly, it is dismissed. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE. lk L.A.A. No. 633 OF 1998 3 KURIAN JOSEPH & K.T. SANKARAN, JJ. ................................................... L.A.A. No. 633 OF 1998 ................................................... Dated this the 13th November, 2008 J U D G M E N T KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE. L.A.A. No. 633 OF 1998 4 lk KURIAN JOSEPH & K.T. SANKARAN, JJ. .................................................. L.A.A. No. 633 OF 1998 ................................................... Dated this the 13th November, 2008 J U D G M E N T Kurian Joseph, J: This Appeal is filed by the State challenging the judgment of the Reference Court, viz., Sub Court, Mavelikkara in L.A.R.No. 180 of 1993. Acquisition is for the purpose of construction of an approach road to Pullamplavu bridge. Section 4(1) notification is dated 02.07.1991. The land acquisition officer fixed the land value at Rs. 723.71 per Are. Based on the documents dated 17.12.1990, the claimant had raised a claim for Rs. 50,000/- per cent . The total extent involved is 4.60 Ares of wet land . The claimant had also a case for injurious affection. According to the claimant, owing to the construction of the approach road, his access to the main road has been cut off, since there is level difference between the road and the L.A.A. No. 633 OF 1998 5 remaining property. The Reference Court, on the basis of the evidence available on record found that the acquired property cannot be treated as a simple water logged puncha land, but at the same it cannot be treated as similar to Ext.A1 dry land. The court below also found that the acquired property is situated on the side of the Mavelikkara -Krishnapuram road and that area is having commercial and industrial importance since the railway station is at a distance of two furlong and court building, hospitals , power house etc are located within a distance of hundred metres from the acquired property. In view of the evidence available on record and particularly taking note of the importance of the locality, by permissible guess work, the Reference Court fixed the land value at Rs. 15,000/- per Are. 2. Having regard to the reasoning adopted by the Reference Court based on evidence, it cannot be said that the land value fixed by the Reference Court, in any way, is unreasonable. For the purpose of meeting the expense towards developing the land to the height of the road constructed in the acquired property, an amount of Rs.40,000/- was awarded by the Reference Court for reclaiming the remaining land. It cannot also be said to be in any way unreasonable. For the reasons stated above, we do not find any merit in the appeal and accordingly, it is dismissed. L.A.A. No. 633 OF 1998 6 KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE. lk KURIAN JOSEPH & K.T. SANKARAN, JJ. ................................................... L.A.A. No. 633 OF 1998 ................................................... Dated this the 13th November, 2008 J U D G M E N T