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 15TH JULY 2010 / 24TH ASHADHA 1932 LA.App..No. 815 of 2010 --------------------------- LAR.337/2008 of III ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT(S)/CLAIMANT: ---------------------------- E.A. ABDUL KAREEM, POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER AND SON OF P.S.NABEESA W/O LATE AHAMAD PILLA HAJI EDAKULATH HOUSE, KUNNUMPURAM, EDAPPILLY (N) VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.WILSON SMT.ROSE MICHAEL RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), N.H. NO.1 KAKKANAD. PIN - 682030. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, N.H. BRIDGES DIVISION, KODUGALLOOR. SMT.LATHA T. THANKAPPAN, SR. GOVT. PLEADER THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.815 of 2010 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J The claimant is the appellant. His property in Edappally North village was acquired for the construction of National Highway-17 pursuant to notification under Section 4(1) published on 14/03/02. The property was included in category- 1 being property with frontage of Edappally Cheranallur PWD Road and was awarded value at Rs.1,26,000/- by the Land Acquisition Officer. Before the Reference Court the evidence consisted of Exts.A1 and A2, R1 and R2, C1 Commission Report apart from oral evidence of AW1. No L. A. A. No.815 of 2010 -2- counter oral evidence was adduced by the Government. The Reference Court on appreciating the evidence would re-fix the market value at Rs.1,76,400/- per Are, thus granting enhancement by 40% over what was granted. 2. In this appeal various grounds have been raised challenging what is described as the inadequacy of the compensation re-determined. Smt.Rose Michael addressed very strenuous arguments before us based on all those grounds. Smt.Latha T. Thankappan, the learned senior Government Pleader would resist all the submissions of Smt.Rose Michael. Smt.Latha however, conceded that this Court has in certain other cases has allowed enhancement of the value of identical property by 60% over what was L. A. A. No.815 of 2010 -3- awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. 3. Having considered the rival submissions, we are of the view that the appeal can be allowed to the extent of re-fixing market value of the land under acquisition at Rs.2,01,600/- per Are, which means that the appellant will be getting 60% enhancement over what was awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. Even though Smt.Rose Michael was very persuasive in her submissions regarding the appellant's claim for compensation for injurious affection, we are not persuaded to accept her submissions. We award an amount of Rs.5,000/- as additional compensation for the building which existed on the property. 4. The appeal will stand allowed only to the above extent. The appellant will be entitled for all L. A. A. No.815 of 2010 -4- statutory benefits admissible under Sections 23 (2), 23(1A) and under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act. Parties are directed to suffer their respective costs. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE C. K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE kns/-