IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 25TH BHADRA 1930 LA.App..No. 940 of 2008(D) -------------------------- LAR.92/2006 of III ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT: ----------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) RAILWAYS, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.NOBLE MATHEW. RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SMT.SYAMALA KUNJAMMA,W/O.ACHUTHAN, CHANDRA BHAVAN, THIRUVANKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNOOR TALUK. 2. HE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER RAILWAYS,ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.S.SUNIL FOR R1 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/09/2008, ALONG WITH LAA 957/08 & 1192/08 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & K.T.SANKARAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- L.A.As.940, 957 & 1192 of 2008 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 16th September, 2008. J U D G M E N T Kurian Joseph, J. These are appeals filed by the State aggrieved by the fixation of land value by the reference court, Sub Court, Ernakulam. The acquisition is for the purpose of doubling of railway track between Ernakulam and Mulanthuruthy. Section 4(1) notification was published on 18.12.2003. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the land value at Rs.5,854/- per Are and the reference court fixed it at Rs.13,658/- per Are. There is no dispute that the acquired properties in these three cases are included in Group No.3. The Land Acquisition Officer relied on document No.1387/01 dated 16.5.2001 for fixing the value of the wet land situated on the side of the railway track. That document is item No.12. The reference court found that the documental value was Rs.9,756/- per Are. It was also found by the reference court from the records that the property covered by the basic document and the properties covered by the acquisition was of the same nature, viz., wet land, both having the same disadvantage of having no road access. Thus, being similarly LAA Nos.940/08 & connected cases 2 situated, the reference court rightly found that there was no point in deducting 40% from the value of the property covered by the basic document. It was also noted that the basic document is executed on 16.5.2001 and the acquisition is pursuant to Section 4(1) notification dated 18.12.2003. In view of the time lag of 2½ years between execution of the basic document and Section 4(1) notification, on the well settled principle of enhancement around 15% per year, 40% enhancement over and above the value of the basic document was awarded in respect of Group (3) wet lands and the value was fixed at Rs.13,658/- per Are. Learned Government pleader vehemently contended that the reference court should not have granted more than 37.5% in any case, since the time lag between the execution of the basic document and Section 4(1) notification is 2 ½ years. We are afraid, the contention cannot be accepted. The basic document is executed on 16.5.2001 whereas Section 4(1) notification is dated 18.12.2003. Therefore, the time lag between the execution of the document and Section 4(1) notification is actually two years, seven months and two days. Therefore, 40% enhancement over LAA Nos.940/08 & connected cases 3 and above the value of the basic document is perfectly justified. The fixation thus made by the reference court being based on evidence available on record and rested on settled principles of law, we do not find any ground to interfere with the reasoning and finding of the said court. We find no merit in the appeals. They are accordingly dismissed. The stay petitions in the appeals are also dismissed. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE. tgs KURIAN JOSEPH & K.T.SANKARAN, JJ ---------------------------------------------- L.A.A. Nos.940, 957 & 1192 of 2008 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 16th September, 2008.