IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 3RD APRIL 2009 / 13TH CHAITHRA 1931 LA.App..No. 288 of 2004() ------------------------- LAR.14/1998 of SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT: ----------------------- 1. YOHANNAN JOY, ( DIED) LR'S IMPLEADED JYOTHIS, PONAKAM MURI, THEKKEKARA, MAVELIKKARA. * 2. KAMALAMMA JOY, JYOTHIS, POAKAM MURI, THEKKEKARA, MAVELIKARA. 3. JISHU SUSAN JOY, AGED 20 YEARS, JYOTHIS, PONAKAM MURI, THEKKEKARA, MAVELIKARA 4. JEEVAN JOY, AGED 13 YEARS, MINOR, REPRESENTED BY HIS GUARDIAN FIRST PETITIONER, JYOTHIS, POAKAM MURI, THEKKEKARA, MAVELIKARA (* ADDL. RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4 ARE IMPLEADED AS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE DECEASED SOLE APPELLANT VIDE ORDER DT. 23.9.04 IN I.A. 3034/2004) BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT: -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LAND ACQUISITION (G), ALAPPUZHA. SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.K. BABU SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BASANT BALAJI THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/04/2009, ALONG WITH LAA NO. 307 OF 2004 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- L.A.A. Nos.288 & 307 OF 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2009 JUDGMENT PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J. All these appeals pertains to acquisition of land in Mavelikkara for the construction of railway siding for the Food Corporation of India. The relevant Section 4(1) notification was published on 11.03.1995. The Land Acquisition Officer categorised the properties as dry lands and awarded the land value at the rate of 17,000/- per are. The evidence produced before the reference court consisted of Exts.A1 to A4, Commissioner's report C1 and C1(a) plan, apart from oral testimony of one of the claimants as AW1. No counter evidence was adduced by the Government or the requisitioning authority. The learned Subordinate Judge on evaluating the evidence re-fixed the land value under acquisition at Rs.20,995/- per are. 2. We have heard submissions of Mr.P.B.Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants and those of Mr.T.P.M.Ibrahim Khan, learned counsel for the requisitioning L.A.A.288 & 307 of 2004 2 authority and learned Senior Government Pleaders Mr.Basant Balaji and Mr.P.K.Babu for the state. Our attention was drawn by Mr.Suresh Kumar to the Common judgment which had been passed by the learned Subordinate Judge in L.A.R. No.31/1998 and connected cases. The learned counsel submitted that the acquisition was pursuant to the very same Section 4(1) notification and the learned Subordinate Judge himself re-fixed market value of the property, which were valued at the rate of Rs.17,000/- per are. There was no justification at all for fixing a lesser market value for the properties under acquisition in these cases. According to the learned counsel, the properties under acquisition in these cases are commercially more important properties, situated at a higher level than the properties covered by the common judgment. The submissions of Mr.Suresh Kumar were resisted by Mr.Ibrahim Khan and also learned Senior Government Pleader. We have considered the facts in detail in L.A.A. No.414 of 2004 and connected cases and approved re-fixation of market value for dry lands at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per are and for wet land Rs.25,000/- per are fixed by the same reference court in other cases covered L.A.A.288 & 307 of 2004 3 by the very same section. Having regard to the reasons stated by us in that judgment and also the obvious circumstances that the acquired properties in these cases were atleast slightly superior to the properties covered by those cases, we do not find any justification for awarding a value lesser than Rs.50,000/- per are for the acquired property in these cases. Accordingly, we allow these appeals, re-fix the land value of the acquired properties at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per are. It is needless to mention that the appellants will be entitled for all statutory benefits under Sections 22(1), 22(2) and 22(3) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act for the enhanced compensation to which he becomes eligible for re-fixation of the market value of the properties. Appeals are allowed but in these circumstances, the parties would suffer costs. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE pac