IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2011 / 6TH SRAVANA 1933 LA.App..No. 1180 of 2010(D) --------------------------- LAR.20/2008 of SUB COURT, PALA .................... APPELLANT: CLAIMANT ---------------------- MATHAI GEORGE, PANTHANICKAL HOUSE, PLASSANAL P.O., ERATTUPETTA. BY ADV. SRI.T.J.MICHAEL SRI.JOSE MATHEW (KAVALAKALAM) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM P.O., PIN-686001. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. T.T.JOSEPHINA THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- LAA. No.1180 of 2010 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The claimant is in appeal. His property in Thalapalam Village situated between Bharanamganam - Erattupetta on the Ettumanoor - Poonjar State Highway was acquired for the purpose of the above State Highway. The acquisition was pursuant to Section 4(1) Notification published on 30-6- 2004. The L.A. Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.12,227/- per Are. Before the Reference Court various documents including Exts.A8 and A9 reflecting a value of Rs.30,000/- per cent and Rs.27,500/- per cent were relied on. The learned Subordinate Judge did not place reliance on any of the documents. Ultimately on over all assessment of the evidence and doing guess work, the learned Subordinate Judge would re-fix the land value at Rs.35,000/- per Are. LAA. 1180/10 -2- 2. In this appeal, various grounds are raised. Assailing the impugned judgment Sri. T.J. Michael, learned counsel for the appellant addressed arguments based on those grounds. All the submissions of Mr. T.J. Michael were stiffly resisted by Smt. T.T. Josephina. 3. The question is whether there is justification for not placing reliance on A8 and A9. We are in agreement with the learned Subordinate Judge who says that the full value reflected in A8 and A9 cannot be granted is for two reasons. One reason is that both related to small plots. Special reason with regard to A8 is that the purchaser is a co-operative Society which was keen on purchasing the property. We feel that placing reliance to a certain extent on Exts.A8 and A9 and relying on the other evidence available in the case the market value of the land under acquisition can be re-fixed more correctly at Rs.47,000/- per Are. 4. Accordingly we re-fix the market value at LAA. 1180/10 -3- Rs.47,000/- per Are. Appeal is allowed to the above extent. The appellant will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Section 23(1A), 23(2) and Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act. However, while decree is drafted and provision is made for interest under Section 28, the section will have due regard to the conditions imposed by this Court in its order dated 7th June, 2011 in C.M. Appln. No. 1849 of 2010. The decree copy will be issued only after ensuring that the full court fee on the appeal memo is paid. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) (C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE) ksv/-