IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2011 / 27TH JYAISHTA 1933 LA.App..No. 980 of 2007(D) -------------------------- LAR.124/2004 of SUB COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA ............................. APPELLANTS/CLAIMANTS ------------------------------------ 1. DAMODARAN NAIR, AGED 68 YEARS, S/O LATE PARAMESWARAN NAIR, KAVANAL HOUSE, AMBALAMEDU P.O., THIRUVANIYUR VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. BHAVANI AMMA, D/O LATE PARAMESWARAN NAIR, KAVANAL HOUSE, AMBALAMEDU P.O., THIRUVANIYUR VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. PRABHAKARAN NAIR, S/O LATE RAMAN NAIR, KAVANAL HOUSE, AMBALAMEDU P.O., THIRUVANIYUR VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. *4. YESODAMMA, W/O DAMODARAN NAIR, KAVANAL HOUSE, AMBALAMEDU P.O., THIRUVANIYUR VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. (DIED) 5. UMADEVI, D/O DAMODARAN NAIR, KAVANAL HOUSE, AMBALAMEDU P.O., THIRUVANIYUR VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. **ADDL.APPELLANTS 6 AND 7 IMPLEADED ADDL.R6.K.D.VIJAYAN, S/O.DAMODARAN NAIR & YESODAMMA, KAVANAL HOUSE, AMBALAMEDU P.O., PUTHENCRUZ VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNAD TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ADDL.R7.K.D.AJESHKUMAR, S/O.DAMODARAN NAIR & YESODAMMA, KAVANAL HOUSE, AMBALAMEDU P.O., PUTHENCRUZ VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNAD TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. LAA 980/07 * IT IS RECORDED THAT THE 4TH APPELLANT DIED ON 22.5.07 AND THE 1ST AND 5TH APPELLANTS ARE THE LR'S OF THE DECEASED APPELLANT VIDE ORDER DT. 3.12.2007 IN I.A.NO.4474/2007. ** ADDL. APPELLANTS 6 AND 7 ARE IMPLEADED AS LR'S OF THE DECEASED 4TH APPELLANT VIDE ORDER DT. 3.12.2007 IN I.A.NO.4474/2007. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.BABU SMT.N.SUDHA RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION BUILDINGS, KAKKANAD, KOCHI-682030. 2. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER(PROJECT), KOCHI REFINERIES LTD., AMBALAMUGAL. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.P.N.SUMANGALA R2 BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR SMT.THUSHARA JAMES THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- L.A.A.No.980 of 2007 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of June, 2011 Judgment Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The claimants are in appeal. Their land in Thiruvaniyur Village was acquired at the instance of the Kochi Refineries Limited. This was pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 4.11.2000. The L.A.O. awarded land value at the rate of Rs.29,000/- per Are. The reference court on evaluating the evidence which came on record refixed the land value at Rs.38,200/- per Are. Our attention is drawn by Smt.N.Sudha, learned counsel for the appellants to the judgment of this court in LAA No.1279 of 2009. According to her, the property involved in that case was identical and was acquired for the same purpose and the same land value was awarded by the L.A.O. as in the present case. Under that judgment, this court has refixed the land value at Rs.42,650/- per Are. She therefore requested that the same land value may be awarded in this case also. She submitted that there were two buildings on the property under LAA 980/07 2 acquisition. For one building, the L.A.O. awarded Rs.1,40,002/- and for the other building the L.A.O. awarded Rs.1,75,336/-. Even though independent evidence was adduced to show that the correct value of buildings was much more, the court below did not discard such evidence. There is justification for enhancing the building value by 40%, so argued the learned counsel. 2. The submission of Smt.Sudha that the judgment in LAA No.1279 of 2009 covers the issue on land value was not seriously disputed by Smt.P.N.Sumangala, learned Government Pleader. We are therefore inclined to refix the land value at Rs.42,650/- per Are relying on the judgment in LAA No.1279 of 2009. We are not very much impressed by the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants that the court below should have approved the valuation made by the independent valuer. At the same time, we feel that there is justification for granting 30% enhancement over the rates awarded by the L.A.O. for the buildings in question. This is because the buildings were valued adopting P.W.D. schedule of rates. It is a matter of common knowledge that P.W.D. schedule of rates are not realistic. Hence, we award to the appellants an amount of Rs.94,541/- as LAA 980/07 3 additional compensation for the buildings (being 30% of the land value awarded by the L.A.O. for the two buildings). The claimants will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Sections 23(2), 23(1A) and Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act. However, while calculating interest under Section 28, the Registry will exclude the period of 87 days by which the appeal was delayed. The appeal is allowed as above, however, no order as to costs. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. srd LAA 980/07 4 LAA 980/07 5