IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.PADMANABHAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 13TH MARCH 2008 / 23RD PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 26402 of 2006(R) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ VARKEY, S/O.FRANCHU @ K.P.GEORGE, KATTAYIL HOUSE, KALLIMALY, MAMMATTIKKANAM P.O., RAJAKKAD, IDUKKI DT. (FROM KOTTAYIL HOUSE, BHARANANGANAM P.O.), KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.J.JOY RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR, LAND ACQUISITION (GENERAL), MINI CIVIL STATION, KOTTAYAM. 3. SRI.K.P.FRANCIS, S/O.FRANCHU, KOTTAYIL HOUSE, BHARANANGANAM P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD ROAD DIVISION, KOTTAYAM. R3 BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM MATHEW (VETTOOR) R1,R2 & R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.26402/2006 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 17/6/2006 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE LAC NO.135 DTD. 17.6.2006 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING SHEET DTD. 24.8.2006 INITIATED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE DEED OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF FORM 22A APPLICATION AND OBJECTION DTD. 18.9.2006 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 18.9.2006 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. K.PADMANABHAN NAIR, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.26402 OF 2006 ------------------------------- Dated this the 13th March, 2008. J U D G M E N T Petitioner is stated to be the owner of 3 cents of land comprised in Sy.No.25/2 (3.11/4-2) of Bhrananganam Village of Meenachil Taluk. He had constructed a building in the land availing a loan from the Housing Board. Thereafter, he is now residing in Idukki District. It is averred that petitioner had constructed a house near his old Tharavadu House, wherein his brother, 3rd respondent is residing. It is averred that his property along with the building was acquired for widening of Kottayam-Poonjar Road. Petitioner was given a notice, in which it was stated that he was awarded an amount of Rs.1,51,282/= towards compensation. It is averred that subsequently he received another notice stating that he was only entitled to get an amount of Rs.89,416/= as compensation for the building. According to the petitioner, though he was awarded compensation for the land, the compensation due to the building was not awarded to him. He submits that the value of the building constructed by him was awarded to the W.P.(C) No.26402/2006 2 3rd respondent, his brother. So, he prays that a direction may be issued to the Land Acquisition Officer to award the actual value of the building constructed by him. 2. The learned Government Pleader submits that there are two buildings in the properties acquired, as admitted by the petitioner himself. Initially, the Land Acquisition Officer had awarded the value of the building which ought to have been awarded to the 3rd respondent to the petitioner, and compensation for the building belonging to the petitioner was awarded to the 3rd respondent. Subsequently that mistake was found out and rectified, and a revised award was passed. It is submitted that there is no factual or legal basis for the averments in the writ petition. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent submits that on receipt of the award enquiry notice, 3rd respondent had filed a statement before the Land Acquisition Officer contending that his building is situated near to the acquired road, and it is bigger, and the value awarded to his building was very low. It is further submitted that in view of the representation, a revised award was passed. W.P.(C) No.26402/2006 3 4. I have called for a report from the Sub Court, Pala. It is reported that there were two LAC's. LAC No.34 was registered with respect to 0.0133 hectares of land comprised in Survey No.311/11 in Block No.36 of Bharananganam Village, belonging to one Francis, (3rd respondent in the writ petition) and the same was referred to Sub Court, and pending as L.A.R.No.168/2007, on account of the claim for enhancement. It is submitted that the petitioner also claimed enhancement and L.A.C.No.35 was registered and that was also referred to Sub Court, Pala, as L.A.R.No.151/2007. It is further stated that L.A.R.No.168/2007 is posted for trial on 6.6.2008, and L.A.R.No.151/2007 is posted on 1.3.2008 for return of notice. The real dispute arose in this case is what exactly is the value of the building to the petitioner, as well as the 3rd respondent. It is an admitted fact that the properties owned by the petitioner as well as the 3rd respondent are situated very close. In both plots, there were buildings. Both buildings were acquired. According to the petitioner, he is entitled to a higher value as originally fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer. According to the 3rd respondent, he is entitled to that amount. So, what exactly is the value of the buildings and who is entitled to the value of the building involved in L.A.C. Nos.34 and 35 are the questions to be decided. In view of the dispute, the Land W.P.(C) No.26402/2006 4 Acquisition Officer ought to have referred this matter also to the Civil Court. So, there will be a direction to the Land Acquisition Officer to make a reference under Section 31 of the Land Acquisition Act for determination as to whether petitioner is entitled to the value of the building involved in L.A.C.No.34 and whether the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer in L.A.C.No.35 stating that the petitioner is entitled to the value of that building alone is correct. It is open to the petitioner to appear before the Sub Court and file a petition for joint trial of all the three references. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. K.PADMANABHAN NAIR, JUDGE nj.