IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 4TH JANUARY 2010 / 14TH POUSHA 1931 LA.App..No. 804 of 2009() ------------------------- LAR.64/2001 of ADDL.SUB COURT,KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. SHYSON P.MANGUZHA RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. BABY PREETHI, NADAYIL THEKKATHIL, MARUTHADI, KAVANADU P.O., KOLLAM. 2. SREELATHA, PALLYVADAKKATHIL, KALAKKODU CHERI, POOTHAKKULAM. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ORDER ON I.A.NO.2337/09 IN LAA NO.804/2009 CLOSED 4/01/2010 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... L.A.A.No.804 OF 2009 ............................................. Dated this the 4th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Land Acquisition Court, Kollam in LAR.No.64/2001. 02.05 Ares of land comprised in R.S.No.10/39 was acquired and land value was fixed at Rs.7,323/= per Are. The claimants relied upon document No.1544/1995 relating to R.S.No.106 wherein 3 Ares of land was purchased by the Co-operative Bank from one Sasidharan Pillai for a total consideration of Rs.1,88,000/=. The land value was claimed at the rate of Rs.62,666/= per Are. The land acquisition court elaborately considered the question and found that the land covered by the said document is negligibly small in extent and it is lying in important locality and it cannot form the basis for fixation of the land value. But the land acquisition court was satisfied with the evidence of PW1 regarding the potential value of the land, its close proximity with different junctions, several commercial and educational institutions. Considering those aspects, the court enhanced the land : 2 : L.A.A.No.804 OF 2009 value by 60% which by any stretch of imagination cannot be said to be on the higher side. Considering the small extent of land involved and the compensation awarded, I do not find any merit to interfere with the decision rendered and therefore the appeal lacks merit and the same is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 3 : L.A.A.No.804 OF 2009