IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2011 / 22ND ASHADHA 1933 LA.App..No. 676 of 2010(D) -------------------------------- LAR.73/2003, 70/2003, 71/2003, AND 72/2003 of SUB COURT, QUILANDY .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT ------------------------------ K.M.JOSE, S/O.MATHEW, KURISUMMOOTTIL HOUSE, CHAKKITTAPARA, PERAMBRA AMSOM DESOM, KOYILANDY TLAUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS --------------------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, TRANSMISSION CIRCLE, NALLALAM, KOZHIKODE. R1 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.V.T.K.MOHANAN R2 BY ADVS. SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB SRI.PULIKOOL ABUBACKER, SC, KSEB THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/07/2011, ALONG WITH LAA NO.680 OF 2010 LAA NO.683OF 2010 LAA NO. 684 OF 2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ---------------------------------- L.A.A.Nos.676, 680, 683 & 684 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT PIUS C. KURIAKOSE ,J. These appeals are preferred by the claimants. The property under acquisition were of Chakkittapara in Koyilandy Taluk. The acquisition was for the purpose of establishment of a 110 KV sub station for the Kerala State Electricity Board, the second respondent in these appeals. The relevant section 4(1) notification was published on 12.06.2010. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded value at the rate of Rs.1,345/- per cent. On the day the reference cases were listed before the learned Subordinate Judge, the appellants / claimants were absent. However, the learned subordinate Judge would mark the document produced by the appellants on the basis of the chief affidavit already filed. Thus, the evidence before the reference Court consisted of Exts.A1 to A4 on the side of the claimant and Ext.C1 commission report. Even though, oral evidence was not L.A.A.Nos.676, 680, 683 & 684 OF 2010 2 adduced on the side of the claimants, the learned Subordinate Judge would evaluate the documentary evidence available and re-fix the land value at the rate of Rs.5,500/- per cent. In these appeals, various grounds are raised assailing what is described as the inadequacy of the compensation re-determined by the reference court. 2. We have heard submissions of Sri.V.N.Ramesan Nambisan, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri.Pulikool Aboobacker, learned standing counsel for the Kerala State Electricity Board and also of Sri.V.T.K.Mohanan, the learned senior Government Pleader. Even though, the learned counsel raised arguments on the basis of the merits of the appellants claim for enhancement, we are not inclined to decide these appeals on merits finally and re-fix the land value. As already stated, this was a case where appellants /claimants were absent when the case was listed for trial. Appellant/ claimant did not adduce evidence to support the market value reflected in Exts.A2 to A4. Considering the facts and circumstances attending on this case, we are inclined to afford opportunity to the appellants to adduce evidence in the case so that the learned subordinate L.A.A.Nos.676, 680, 683 & 684 OF 2010 3 Judge can pass revised awards based on the evidence available on record. At the same time, we are imposing conditions as we notice that there was considerable lethargy on the part of the appellants in the matter of adducing evidence to substantiate their claims before the reference court. 3. All these appeals are thus allowed by way of remand. The judgment and decree under appeal are set aside. L.A reference are remitted back to the subordinate Judges' Court, Koyilandy. The learned subordinate Judge is directed to pass revised award in LARs Nos.70, 71, 72 and 73 of 2003 after affording opportunity to all the parties to adduce further evidence. The learned subordinate Judge will pass revised awards on the basis of the evidence which comes to be on record. However, we make it clear that this judgment will become operative only subject to the following conditions:- (i) The appellants will pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- each to the Standing Counsel for the requisitioning authority in this Court within three weeks from today and produce receipts before the reference court. L.A.A.Nos.676, 680, 683 & 684 OF 2010 4 (ii) The appellants will forfeit 10% of the court fee remitted by them on the appeal memoranda to the Government. This means that only 90% of the court fee will be refunded to the appellants. (iii) In case, under the revised award of the reference court the appellants become eligible for enhanced compensation over and above, what is awarded under the judgment impugned in these appeals, such enhancement will not carry interest under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act during the period from 08.10.2004 till this date. This will obviously supercedes similar conditions imposed by this court in the applications for condoning delay caused in the matter of filing the appeals. Parties will enter appearance before the subordinate Judge on 09.08.2011. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE dmb