IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 27TH MAGHA 1932 LA.App..No. 15 of 2005(C) ------------------------- LAR.190/1994 of III ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT(S)/CLAIMANT: -------------- 1. ABDUL KHADER, S/O.AHAMMADKUTTY UNNI, PADINJAREVETTAVELI PARAMBIL, PUTHUPALLIPRAM KARA, EDAPPALLY P.O. 2. MOHAMMED, S/O.AHAMMEDKUTTY UNNI, PADINJAREVETTAVELI PARAMBIL, PUTHUPALLIPRAM KARA, EDAPPALLY P.O. BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM DIST., CIVIL STATION, KAKKANADU. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LATHA T.THANKAPPAN FOR R THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.No. 15 OF 2005 ------------------------ Dated this the 16th day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The claimants are in appeal. This appeal is confined to their claim for enhanced compensation for the building and the compound wall which existed on the property under acquisition. The claim of the appellants was for a total amount of Rs.5 Lakhs. As against this, the awarding officer awarded only Rs.2,13,514/-. On going through the impugned judgment, we find that the issue of the correct compensation payable for the building was not addressed by the learned Sub Judge at all. 2. Having considered the grounds raised in the appeal memorandum as well as the submissions addressed before us by Sri.S.Sreekumar learned counsel for the appellant and Smt.Latha T.Thankappan,learned senior Government Pleader, we are of the view that the court below was not justified in not awarding any enhancement towards the building and compound wall. After all, it was on the basis of the PWD's published scheduled of rates that the Land Acquisition Authorities determined the L.A.A.No.15/2005 2 compensation payable for the building and the compound wall. It is a matter of common knowledge that construction of buildings as per the PWD scheduled of rates is not a very pragmatic propositions. Even the PWD tendering out its civil works at 30 to 35% more than its published rates. Taking all these aspects into account, we allow the appeal to the extent of awarding to the appellants a total amount of Rs.70,000/- as additional compensation towards value of the building and the compound wall. The amount of Rs.70,000/- is due to all the three claimants together. As only claimants 1 and 2 have come up in appeal, the amount due to the appellants fixed at Rs.46,666/- which we round off to Rs.46,700/-. The above amount of Rs.46,700/- will carry all statutory benefits. However, while interest under Section 28 is calculated, the Registry will have due regard to the conditions imposed by us in the delay petition. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE dpk L.A.A.No.15/2005 3 PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.No. 15 OF 2005 ------------------------ JUDGMENT 16th February 2011.