IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 23RD MAY 2011 / 2ND JYAISHTA 1933 LA.App..No. 1496 of 2009() -------------------------- LAR.80/2003 of PRL.SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT NO.2: ------------------------------ THE SECRETARY, BEYPORE GRAMA PANCHAYAT BEYPORE, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT & RESPONDENT NO.1: ------------------------------------------ 1. C.K.JAYASANKAR, KKOMATH HOUSE, P.O.BEYPORE, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), KOZHIKODE. ADV. SMT.T.RESMI DAMODARAN FOR R1 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. T.T.JOSEPHINA FOR R2 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- LAA. No. 1496 of 2009 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2011 J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan, J. The Secretary, Beypore Panchayat, the requisitioning authority is in appeal. An extent of 0.1659 hectares of land in RS. No. 48/4 was acquired. The acquisition was for construction of a playground. The Land Acquisition Officer determined compensation fixing land value at Rs.17,308/- per cent. The property was a garden land. After considering the evidence adduced by the parties including the commissioner's report, the reference court enhanced the compensation re-fixing the land value at Rs.22,000/- per cent. 2. The requisitioning authority/appellant contends that the property involved in this case belonging to this claimant is not having road frontage and that as per Ext.A3 judgment of this Court in LAA. Nos. 666 of 2004 and 1129 of 2005 the land value was reduced to Rs.22,000/-. This submission made by Sri. P.V. Kunhikrishnan, learned counsel for the requisitioning authority is -2- resisted by Smt. Reshmi Damodaran, the learned counsel appearing for the claimant pointing out that in A3 judgment it was found that the property involved in this case is having road frontage and that was the reason why in Ext.A3 the land value was reduced to Rs.22,000/-. On going through the commissioner's report also it is seen that the property acquired and made mention of in this case is also having road frontage. As such the contention that the compensation fixed by the court below relying on Ext.A3 at Rs.22,000/- per cent should be reduced is unmerited. We find no reason to reduce the compensation fixed by the court below at the rate of Rs.22,000/- per cent. In the result, this appeal is dismissed. The parties are directed to suffer their respective costs. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) (N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE) ksv/-