IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI TUESDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2009 / 30TH POUSHA 1930 LA.App..No. 2021 of 2008() -------------------------- LAR.104/2003 of I ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, (SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LA, NH, KESAVADASAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM), REP. BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LATHA .T.THANKAPPAN RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT ----------------------- 1. N.NAGHAMMAL, W/O LATE KRISHNAN CHETTIAR, TC 20/2284, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. K.SURESH BABU, T.C.20/2321, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. K.SELVARAJ, TC 20/2321, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. N.JAYAPRADA, NIJA, T.C.50/1053, THALIYAL KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. N.HEMALATHA, TC 20/2284, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. THE SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY(TRIDA), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.C.KHALID FOR R1,4 & 5 SRI.N.GOPINATHA PANICKER FOR R1,4 & 5 SRI.R.O.MUHAMED SHEMEEM FOR R1,4 & 5 SRI.T.P.SAJID FOR R1,4 & 5 SMT.NAMITHA JYOTHISH FOR R1,4 & 5 SMT.P.S.MAHESWARI FOR R1,4 & 5 SRI.K.A.JALEEL, SC., TRIDA FOR R6 SMT.P.V.ASHA FOR R2,3 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.No.2021 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius.C.Kuriakose, J. This appeal by the Government pertains to acquisition of land in Thycaud village within the limits of Thiruvananthapuram corporation pursuant to section 4(1) notification published on 03/08/1999 for the widening of the road from Karamana to Killippalam Reach III. The land acquisition officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs. 1,56,831/- per Are relying on the basis document No. 2390/97 of Chala Sub Registry including the property in category No.5. 2. Before the reference court, the evidence on the side of the claimant mainly consisted of Ext.A1 sale deed No. 1592/99 dated 21//06/1999. Ext.A1 was proved by AW1, the claimant. The court below on evaluating the evidence found that the land acquisition officer was not justified in categorising the properties under acquisition into A and B and would do away with the categorisation and adopt a uniform rate of value for properties which had been included in categories A LAA.No.2021/08 2 and B. The court found that the property covered by the basis document was much inferior to the acquired property which enjoyed frontage of the national highway. The court accordingly did not place reliance on the basis document. The court accepted AW1's testimony and found that the property covered by Ext.A1 was comparable. Ext.A1 revealed a land value of Rs. 3,30,000/- per cent corresponding to Rs.8,15,430/- per Are. However, the court became inclined to award only Rs. 6,00,000/- per Are for the acquired properties. 3. Despite the very forceful submissions of the learned senior Government Pleader assailing the findings of the reference court, we are not persuaded to hold that the judgment of the reference court warrants interference. According to us, it is more or less the correct market value of the property at the relevant time which has been arrived at by the learned Sub Judge. We, therefore, approve the market value fixed by the reference court for the properties under acquisition. However, as rightly pointed out by the learned senior Government Pleader, it is obvious that a mistake has crept into the judgment while granting the special amount under Section 23(1) (A ) at the rate of LAA.No.2021/08 3 12%. The claimant is entitled for amount under Section 23(1)(A) only for the period from 03/08/1999 till 21/10/1999. The judgment under appeal will stand interfered with only to the extent of correcting the period during which the amount under Section 23(1)(A) is allowable to the respondent as 03/08/1999 to 21/10/1999 instead of 03/08/1998 to 21/10/1999. In all other respects, the judgment under appeal will stand confirmed. It is again clarified that the respondent will be entitled for the amount under Section 23(1)(A) for the period from the date of the last date of publication of the notification under Section 4(1) till the date of taking over of possession which in this case is prior to the date of the award. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE M.C.HARI RANI JUDGE sv. LAA.No.2021/08 4