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 22ND JULY 2010 / 31ST ASHADHA 1932 LA.App..No. 1578 of 2007(D) --------------------------- LAR.116/2004 of ADDL.SUB COURT,PARAVUR .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANTS 1 TO 5 ------------------------------ 1. LEELA, D/O.LATE MEENAKSHI AMMA, KAVANAL HOUSE, AMBALAMEDU P.O., PUTHENCRUZ VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNAD TALUK. 2. SUBHADRA, D/O.LATE MEENAKSHI AMMA, KAVANAL HOUSE, AMBALAMEDU P.O., PUTHENCRUZ VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNAD TALUK. 3. SASIDHARAN, S/O.LATE MEENAKSHI AMMA, KAVANAL HOUSE, AMBALAMEDU P.O., PUTHENCRUZ VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNAD TALUK. 4. MURALEEDHARAN, S/O.LATE MEENAKSHI AMMA, KAVANAL HOUSE, AMBALAMEDU P.O. PUTHENCRUZ VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. 5. PREMACHANDRAN, S/O.LATE MEENAKSHI AMMA, KAVANAL HOUSE, AMBALAMEDU P.O., PUTHENCRUZ VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.BABU RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION BUILDINGS, KAKKANAD, KOCHI - 682 030. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KOCHI REFINERIES LTD., VYTTILA, KOCHI. ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR FOR R2 SRI.NITHIN GEORGE FOR R2 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.V.T.K.MOHANAN THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.No. 1578 OF 2007 ------------------------ Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The claimants are in appeal. Their properties in Puthencruz village were acquired pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 4.11.2000 for the purposes of Cochin Refineries Ltd. Properties were included in category 4 i.e. inferior dry lands and the LAO awarded value at the rate of Rs.29,000/- per Are. The claimants relied on various documents. The learned Subordinate Judge did not rely on the documents produced by the claimants. Ultimately taking a cue from Ext.A3, which was reference file pertaining to some other case, the learned Subordinate Judge enhanced the market value of the property by 11.72% and refixed at Rs.32,400/-. 2.Having considered the grounds raised and the submissions addressed before us by Sri.K.S.Babu, learned counsel for the appellants, and also by Smt.Thusara James, LAA.No.1578/2007 2 learned counsel for the requisitioning authority and having kept in mind the relevant materials and binding judicial precedents governing the issue, we are of the view that the learned Subordinate Judge was a little miserly when it came to fixing the market value. We are informed that Ext.A4 judgment was carried in appeal by the claimants and this Court enhanced the rate granted by the Reference Court. We are of the view that on a better assessment based on all relevant materials, the market value of the land under acquisition can be refixed at Rs. 40,000/- per Are. As pointed out by Smt.Thusara, the properties under acquisition was a large plot extending to 42 Ares. In view of the largeness of the plot, we are of the view that, in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Atma Singh (dead) through LRs and others v. State of Haryana and another (2008 )2 SCC 568) we make a cut of 5% and fix the market value of the land under acquisition at Rs.38,000/- per Are. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. The appellants/claimants will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under section 23(2) , 23(1A) and section 28 of the Act on the total enhanced compensation to which they become LAA.No.1578/2007 3 eligible by virtue of this judgment. The parties are directed to suffer their respective costs. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM , JUDGE dpk