IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2011 / 29TH ASHADHA 1933 LA.App..No. 1091 of 2010() --------------------------------------- LAR.14/2006 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT --------------------------------------- JAYANTHI KUMARI,T.C.31/571(1)PADMASREE, PETTAH.P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.P.DEYANANTHAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS ------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY,TRIDA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.K.MOHANAN R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC, TRIDA THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss LAA. NO.1091/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES A-A:- COPY OF THE POSSESSION TAKEN NOTICE ISSUED LAC-237/04 DT. 13.9.2004. A-B:- COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE L.A. OFFICER. A-C:- COPY OF THE POSSESIION NOTICE IN LA. NO.237/04 DTD. 25.5.2005. A-D:- COPY OF THE AWARD NOTICE DTD. 25.5.2005. A-E:- COPY OF THE REFERENCE APPLICATION DT. 15.6.2005. A-F:- COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DT. 24.5.2010 IN L.A.A. NO.205/2009. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES NIL:- TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JJ. ------------------------------- LAA.NO. 1091 of 2010 --------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose,J. The claimant is in appeal. As regards the claims in the appeal, they are two fold. First is that the actual extent acquired from his possession was 34.32 sq.meters and not 30 sq.meters mentioned in the award of the Land Acquisition Officer and the award of the Reference Court. The second claim is based on Annexure -F judgment and is for refixation of land value at Rs.14 lakhs per Are. 2. Having considered the rival submissions addressed, we have no difficulty in upholding the second claim based on Annexure-F and refixing the value of the land under acquisition at Rs.14 lakhs per Are. We do not find way to uphold the first claim. The argument of Mr. Deyananthan, learned counsel for the appellant was based on Annexure-A notice under section 9 (3). It is trite as regards the extent, the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer as well as under the declaration under LAA.1091/2010 2 section 6 rules. In both of them the extent was 30 sq.meters only. Importantly the appellant did not take any steps for conducting measurement and for finding out the exact extent of the acquired property. We repell the first claim. The appeal is allowed only to the extent of refixing the land value at Rs.14 lakhs per Are. The appellant will be entitled for statutory benefits also on the refixed compensation. Parties are however directed to suffer their respective costs. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/ LAA.1091/2010 3