IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2009 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 LA.App..No. 2144 of 2008() -------------------------- LAR.363/2005 of PRL.S.C.,THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S): 2ND RESPONDENT IN LAR: ----------------------------------------------------------------- THE GENERAL MANAGER, K.S.I.D.C. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. MR.D.KRISHNANKUTTY PILLAI, MR.SHEEJO CHACKO. RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT AND IST RESPONDENT IN LAR: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. PUTHANPURAYIL SAROJINI, PUTHANPURAYIL HOUSE, P.O.MOORIYAD. 2. THE SPL.THASILDAR, L.A., THALASSERY. R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. SHYSON P.MANGUZHA THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/12/2009 ALONG WITH LAA NO. 2147 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ORDER ON I.A.NO.4856/2008 IN LAA.NO.2144/2008 DISMISSED 7/12/2009 SD/- M.N.KRISHHAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... L.A.A.Nos.2144 &2147 OF 2008 ............................................. Dated this the 7th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T These two appeals are preferred against the award of the Land Acquisition Court, Thalassery in LAR.No.363/2005 and LAR.No.361/2005. LAR.No.361/2005 relates to acquisition of 0.0133 hectares of land comprised in R.S.No.10/1 of Koothuparamba village and LAR.No.363/2005 relates to acquisition of an extent of 0.0032 hectares of land in RS.No.29/3 of Koothuparamba village. The Land Acquisition Court by a common judgment along with LAR.No.249/05 disposed of the cases fixing the land value at Rs.10,000/= per cent in each of the cases. In LAR.No.249/2005 there was a commission and the Commissioner’s report was marked as Ext.X1 and the claimant was examined as AW1. So far as these cases are concerned, the claimants were not examined and there was no Commissioner's plan and report with respect to the properties acquired. It was at the time of evidence, the Commissioner mentioned that he had visited these two properties also and he had frankly : 2 : L.A.A.Nos.2144 &2147 OF 2008 conceded that no work memo has been given to him with respect to the properties acquired. Therefore, when the document namely Ext.X1 does not reveal anything with respect to the properties involved in LAR.Nos.361/2005 and 363/2005, it may not be correct on the part of the court relying upon the oral evidence given by the Commissioner which is not in the Commissioner's report to award compensation. Further to complicate the issue, the claimants had not tendered evidence before the court as well. Therefore, the basis on which the compensation is awarded is not proved and therefore, the matter requires reconsideration at the hands of the land acquisition court. 2. So, the award under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the land acquisition court with a direction to permit all the applicants as well as the respondent in the case to produce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. If the claimants are desirous of taking out commission, let that be permitted and the matter be disposed of. The parties are : 3 : L.A.A.Nos.2144 &2147 OF 2008 directed to appear before the land acquisition court on 12.01.2010. Refund the full court fee paid to the counsel for the appellant in these cases. Disposed of accordingly M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 4 : L.A.A.Nos.2144 &2147 OF 2008