IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2011 / 31ST JYAISHTA 1933 LA.App..No. 151 of 2011(C) ------------------------------ LAR.208/08 OF THE 1ST ADDL. SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPELLANT(S): 2ND CLAIMANT ----------------------------------- G.MADHAVAN NAIR, RESIDING AT 'SREETHILAKOM', KUMARAPURAM, PATTOM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK FROM KUNJU VEEDU, KUNNUKUZHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.G.PARAMESWARA PANICKER, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS ------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE SECRETARY, TRIDA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. ADV. SRI.K.A.JALEEL, SC., TRIDA FOR R2 GOVT. PLEADER SMT.T.T.JOSEPHINA THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & N. K. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.151 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 21st day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J The claimant is in appeal being not satisfied with the award of the Reference Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The acquisition was for the purpose of widening of G.G. Hospital, Kumarapuram, National Highway byepass (Reach No.1). The relevant Section 4(1) notification was published on 24/06/06. The land was garden land with buildings. In the present appeal, the claim is confined to enhancement in land value. The Land Acquisition Officer has fixed land value at ` 2,48,125/- per Are. Before the Reference Court, the appellant relied on Ext.A1 sale deed. Ext.A1 sale deed was discarded from consideration for the reason that the same is a post notification document. We do not find any difficulty in approving the action of the learned Subordinate Judge in having discarded Ext.A1 from consideration. The other L. A. A. No.151 of 2011 -2- document was Ext.A2. Ext.A2 was a common judgment of the same court in two other cases. Under Ext.A2 the land value of identical lands has been re-fixed at ` 13 lakhs per Are. Ext.A2 was also not relied on for the reason that appeals were pending before this Court against Ext.A2. Sri.P.G.Parameswara Panicker, the learned senior counsel for the appellant submitted that even without considering Ext.A2 and Ext.A1, this Court can easily allow the present appeal wherein claim for land value is limited to ` 12,35,000/- per Are. The submission of Sri.Panicker were opposed by Smt.T.T.Josephina, the learned Government Pleader. According to her in L.A.A.1145/10 this Court had fixed the value of identical lands at ` 10 lakhs per Are only. 2. Having considered the submissions addressed at the Bar, we are of the view that the appeal can be allowed in full. It is true that in L.A.A.1145/10, the market value of properties in a nearby village was re-fixed at ` 10 lakhs per Are. But it is clear that the properties in L.A.A.1145/10 has been re-fixed at ` 10 lakhs per Are. But, per se the L. A. A. No.151 of 2011 -3- properties under acquisition were superior. The Land Acquisition Officer has awarded more than double the rate which was granted by him to the property which was subject matters in L.A.A.1145/10. We keep in mind various other judgments of this Court fixing value of land in Pattom and nearby villages in respect of identical properties and allow the appeal in full. We re-fix the value of the lands under acquisition at ` 12,35,000/- per Are. The appeal is allowed. The appellant will get costs in this appeal also. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE N. K. BALAKRISHNAN JUDGE kns/-