IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL THURSDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1933 LA.App..No. 361 of 2006(A) -------------------------------- LAR.220/1999 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT/ADDL.2ND RESPONDENT. -------------------------------------------- PROJECT OFFICER-I, OECF, PROJECT, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, NOW REDESIGNATED AS PROJECT MANAGER, JBIC ASSISTED KERALA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM SUB PROJECT, WATER WORKS CAMPUS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 033. BY ADVS. SRI.BABU VARGHESE, SC, KWA SRI.M. DINESH, SC., KWA. RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS AND 1ST RESPONDENTS. ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. L.PRAMEELA, RESIDING AT PUTHUKUNNU PUTHEN VEEDU, POWDIKONAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. B.GEORGE, RESIDING AT PUTHUKUNNU PUTHENVEEDU, POWDIKONAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADVS. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.V.VIJULAL R3 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. C.R.SHYAMKUMAR THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.HARILAL,JJ ------------------------------------------------- L.A.A No.361 of 2006 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T Pius C. Kuriakose, J The requisitioning authority has become in appeal. The property was in Uliyazhathura Village of Thiruvananthapuram District and the acquisition was for the purpose of the Kerala Water Authority. The land acquisition officer awarded land value of Rs.5,123/- per are only for these properties, which were lying by the side of the Powdikonam Pothencode Public Road. 2. The learned subordinate judge noticed that Ext.A5 document reflected a value of more than Rs.58,140/- per are. He also noticed Ext.A6 reflected a land value of Rs.44,444/- per are. He further found that two other documents produced by the claimants reflected even higher value, but he has not given the details of the correct value reflected in those documents. But we find that in the impugned judgment that the learned sub judge has preferred Annexure A5 to A6 and awarded the full value reflected in Annexure A5 to the claimants. We find that in comparison with Annexure A5, A6 is in respect of larger extent. L.A.A No.361 of 2006 2 It is in evidence that Annexure A5 property and Annexure A6 property were both having the frontage of Powdikonam Pothencode Public Road and was situated near to each other. We feel that the learned subordinate judge was not justified in awarding the full value reflected in Ext.A5 which pertains to smaller extent. According to us while taking into account, Annexure A5 and A6 the value of the acquired property can be reasonably fixed at Rs.51,300/- per are. Hence we allow this appeal and refix the land value at the rate of Rs.51,300/- per are. 3. Needless to mention that the claimants will be entitled to all statutory benefits. The appeal is allowed. However without any order as to the costs. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE K.HARILAL JUDGE ab