IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2009 / 12TH JYAISHTA 1931 LA.App..No. 1119 of 2008() -------------------------- LAR.45/2002 of ADL.SUB COURT, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT ---------------------- V.M.PRABHAVATHI, W/O.DR.P.VASUDEVAN, MANYIL HOUSE, P.O.IRINGAL VIA., VATAKARA, CALICUT DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SERGI JOSEPH THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR,LA (NH), THALASSERY. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, N.H.DIVISION, KANNUR. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT NO REPRESENTATION FOR THE APPELLANT. THE APPEAL WILL STAND DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT. 2/6/2009 SD/- PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. SD/- P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.No.1119 OF 2008 ------------------------ Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. This is an appeal by the claimant and the case pertains to acquisition of land for the construction of Thalassery - Mahe bye pass. Relevant Section 4(1) notification was published on 13/3/2000. The land acquisition officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.7902/- per cent making 20% cut on the market value revealed by the basis document, on the reason that the acquired properties did not have road accesses. The reference court would enhance the value to Rs.14,000/- per cent on the basis of the evidence which consisted of Exts.A1 to A4 and the oral testimony of AW1 and the commission report Ext.X1 and X1(a) valuation statement submitted by the commissioner. Significantly, there was no counter evidence on the side of the Government. 2. We have heard the submissions of Sri. Sergi Joseph Thomas, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri.Bijoy L.A.A..No.1119/2008 2 Chandran, learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. Our attention was drawn by the learned counsel for the appellant to the judgment of this court in L.A.A. No.1254/2005, which was a case where the land acquisition officer had granted land value at the rate of Rs.7771/- per cent and this court approved the refixation of the same by the reference court at Rs.17,500/- per cent. The acquisition was for the same purpose and the notification under Section 4(1) was also same. The learned counsel for the claimant argued that there is justification for granting at least 17,500/- in this case also. 4. We are not inclined to accept the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant in full. Admittedly, the acquired properties in this case and the acquired properties covered by L.A.A. 1254/2005 belong to different categories and that it was conceded by the learned Government Pleader in that appeal that the property was comparable to another item of property which was subject matter of another land acquisition case wherein the reference court granted Rs.17500/- per cent. That is not the situation in this case. However, we feel that there is justification for granting some enhancement to the appellant on the basis of L.A.A..No.1119/2008 3 the evidence which is available on record. Ext.X1 commission report has stated that the acquired property was having direct frontage of a Panchayat Road. To Ext.X1 report, no objection whatsoever was filed by the Government and,as already stated, not even formal counter evidence was adduced by the Government. Ext.A4 was a court judgment. what the court below has done is to place some reliance on Ext.A4 judgment and the commission report and to conclude that the market value is Rs.14000/-. Determination of market value in land acquisition cases will invariably involve some guess work. According to us, making good guess work regarding the market value of the acquired property with reference to the evidence available on record including the commission report and Ext.A4, the correct market value of the acquired property at the relevant time will come to Rs.16,000/- per cent. Accordingly, we allow this appeal and refix the market value of the acquired property at Rs.16,000/- per cent. It is needless to mention that the appellant will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Section 23(1A), 23(2) and Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act on the total enhanced L.A.A..No.1119/2008 4 compensation to which she becomes eligible on account of our refixation of the compensation under this judgment. The appeal will stand allowed, but in the circumstances, without any order as to costs. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE dpk