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 9TH JULY 2010 / 18TH ASHADHA 1932 LA.App..No. 433 of 2010(C) -------------------------- LAR.104/2007 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,N. PARAVUR .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT IN LAR ------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. P.N.SUMANGALA RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT IN LAR ------------------------------ MARY, W/O.KUNJUKUNJU, THANNIKODE, OLANADU KARA. ADV. SRI.ANIL KUMAR SREEDHARAN FOR R THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- LAA. No. 433 of 2010 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The Government is in appeal. The property under acquisition was in Kottuvally Village and the purpose of acquisition was for widening of N.H. 17 from Varapuzha to Cheriappilly. The relevant section 4(1) notification was published on 23-8-2004. The land acquisition officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.1, 21,213/- per Are. The Reference Court relying mainly on Ext.A1 document executed in favour of Believers Church represented by one Dr.K.P.Yohannan, re-fixed land value at Rs.2,16,510/- per Are. Apart from Ext.A1, there was commissioner's report. But what we find from the judgment is that the learned Subordinate Judge after observing that there is no dependable evidence on the basis of which the market value can be fixed, it took Ext.A1 as a genuine transaction and -2- relied on Ext.A1 itself after deducting 15% from the value reflected in A1 and by granting additions at the rate of 15% per year for the passage of time. We are of the view that the purchaser under Ext.A1 was in a mood to pay slightly more than the then market value as he was very keen on purchasing the property for establishing a unit of his church in the area, which was an area inhabited predominantly by the members of the Christian community. We are therefore of the view that the deduction of 15% made by the learned Subordinate Judge from the value reflected in A1 was insufficient. The property was situated near Koonammavu which cannot be said to be completely urbanised. We are therefore unable to approve the view of the learned Sub Judge that land value had been increasing in that area at the rate of 15% per year. On a re-assessment of the market value on the basis of the evidence on record we re- fix the market value of the land under acquisition at -3- Rs.2,06,000/- per Are, which is about 70% over what was awarded by the LAO. The appeal stands allowed to the above extent. Needless to mention that the claimant will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible on the enhanced compensation to which they become eligible by virtue of this judgment. Parties are directed to suffer their costs. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) (C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE) ksv/-