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 5TH MARCH 2009 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1930 LA.App..No. 228 of 2009() ------------------------- LAR.128/2006 of SUB COURT, PAYYANNUR .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER -------------- THALIYAN PADINHARE VEETTIL CHERIYA NARAYANAN NAIR, S/O.LATE KORA PODUVAL, RAMANTHALI, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. THE GENERAL MANAGER, BSNL, TELECOM, KANNUR. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR. 3. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) THALASSERY, KANNUR. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI FOR R2 & 3 SRI.MATHEWS K.PHILIP,SC, BSNL FOR R1 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.No.228 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 5th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius.C.Kuriakose, J. Sri.Mathews.K.Philip takes notice on behalf of the first respondent - requisitioning authority and the Government Pleader Sri.Basant Balaji takes notice on behalf of respondents 2 and 3. We have heard the submissions of Sri.M.Sasindran, learned counsel for the appellant and those of Sri.Mathews.K.Philip and the government pleader. 2. It appears to us that the appellant has a legitimate grievance. The appellant was the owner of a total extent of roughly 53.9 cents of land in RS.No.110/7 of Ramanthali village. Out of the above property, substantial portion extending to 49.4 cents was acquired at the instance of the first respondent for the establishment of a telephone exchange and being dis-satisfied with the value determined by the awarding officer, the appellant initiated a reference under Section 18 to the Subordinate Judge's court which was registered by that court as L.A.A.No.228/09 2 L.A.R.No.33/04. That reference was answered fixing the value of the acquired property at Rs. 13,000/- per cent. We are informed that such fixation by the reference court in L.A.R.No.33/04 has become final. The reminder portion of the appellant's property extending to 4.5 cents was not acquired due to the reason that the same contain certain objectionable elements like 'Nagaprathishta' and 'Bhandaram'. The appellant invoked Section 49 of the Land Acquisition Act and when his request was not granted, he approached this court and ultimately the above remainder extent was also ordered to be acquired. Under the impugned judgment, the reference court has fixed the market value of the remainder extent so acquired at Rs. 8,000/- only. The prominent submission of Sri.M.Sasindran is that there is no justification at all for not granting atleast Rs. 13,000/- per cent which was granted to the appellant by the reference court in L.A.R.No.33/04. We find considerable force in the above submission of Sri.M.Sasindran. Accordingly, we allow the appeal to the extent of refixing the market value of the property acquired in this case at Rs. 13,000/- per cent. The appellant will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under L.A.A.No.228/09 3 Section 23(2) and 23(1-A), and Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act on the enhanced compensation becoming payable to him on account of refixation of the market value at Rs. 13,000/-. Parties are directed to suffer their costs throughout. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE sv. L.A.A.No.228/09 4