IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2010 / 29TH POUSHA 1931 LA.App..No. 2425 of 2008() -------------------------- LAR.26/2005 of SUB COURT, VADAKARA .................... APPELLANT(S)/CLAIMANTS: -------------- 1. C.CHANDRAN, S/O.KANNAN, AGED 59 YEARS KARIMPANAVAYALIL HOUSE, POST PUDUPPANAM VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,KERALA STATE 2. SANTHA,D/O.KANNAN, AGED 62 YEARS HOUSE WIFE,KARIMPANAVAYALIL HOUSE, POST PUDUPPANAM VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,KERALA STATE 3. CHANDRI,D/O.KANNAN,AGED 58 YEARS HOUSE WIFE,KARIMPANAVAYALIL HOUSE, POST PUDUPPANAM VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,KERALA STATE 4. RAJAN,S/O.KANNAN, AGED 50 YEARS,TRADER KARIMPANAVAYALIL HOUSE, POST PUDUPPANAM VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,KERALA STATE 5. SURENDRAN, S/O.KANNAN, AGED 47 YEARS' TRADER KARIMPANAVAYALIL HOUSE, POST PUDUPPANAM VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,KERALA STATE 6. PADMINI, D/O.KANNAN, AGED 62 YEARS HOUSE WIFE,KARIMPANAVAYALIL HOUSE, POST PUDUPPANAM VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,KERALA STATE 7. PAVITHRAN, S/O.KANNAN, AGED 40 YEARS TRADER,KARIMPANAVAYALIL HOUSE, POST PUDUPPANAM VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,KERALA STATE BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNAN SRI.R.PARTHASARATHY (...2) LAA.2425/08 (2) RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) NATIONAL HIGHWAY-I,CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY DIVISION, KOZHIKODE. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. LATHA T. THANKAPPAN THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ---------------------------------- L.A.A. No. 2425 of 2008 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T --------------------- Pius C.Kuriakose,J. The claimants are in appeal. The property under acquisition was in Vadakara Village within the limits of Vadakara Muncipality. The acquisition was pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 27.5.2002. The purpose of the acquisition was widening of NH-17 and the re- construction of Karimpanappalam, a bridge within the area of Vadakara Muncipality. Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.27,368/- per cent. Reference court under the impugned judgment re-fixed the same at Rs.50,000/- per cent. Evidence before the reference court, we notice, consisted mainly of Exts.A3 & A4 and the oral testimonies of AW1 to 4 on the side of the claimants and Ext.B1 and the oral evidence of RW1 to 3 on the side of the Government. Apart from the commission reports and plans, Ext.X1 to 4 were also in evidence. Ext.A3 a pre-notification document reflected a land value of Rs.1,75,000/- per cent. L.A.A./2425/08 2 Ext.A4, again a pre-notification document executed 2 months prior to notification reflected a land value of Rs.75,000/- per cent. Advocate Commissioner compared the property under acquisition with the properties covered by Ext.A3 & A4. The report of the commissioner was that the property under acquisition was slightly inferior to Ext.A3 property but far superior to Ext.A4 property. Therefore the commissioner recommended for award of Rs.1,18,000/- per cent for the property under acquisition. 2. The learned Subordinate Judge did not become inclined to place any reliance on Ext.A3 & A4 for the reason that the parties connected to it were not examined as witnesses. What the court below did ultimately was to do guess work and re-fix the market value at Rs.50,000/- on the basis of the oral evidence. Learned counsel for the appellants addressed us very strenuously on the various grounds raised in this memorandum of appeal. He submitted that the reference court was not at all justified in not placing reliance on Ext.A3 & A4. Even the commissioner reports ought to have been accepted since the commissioner was examined and since the commissioner's testimony in chief examination was in conformity with his report was not at all L.A.A./2425/08 3 shaken in cross-examination. Learned counsel requested that at least the value reflected in Ext.A4 be awarded considering the value and the potentialities of the properties. All the above submissions were stiffly resisted by the learned senior Government Pleader, Smt. Latha T. Thankappan. 3. We considered rival submissions and also the items of evidence to which our attention was drawn by the learned counsel for the appellants. We are of the view that the court below was not justified in discarding Ext.A4 completely. Ext.A4 though could not have been relied on completely for the purpose of determination of market value, the same could have been noticed as a document giving some indication as to market value of the property at the relevant time. According to us, on a better assessment of the entire evidence on record, the market value of the land under acquisition can be fixed at Rs.65,500/- per cent. This means that over and above what was awarded by the reference court, the appellants will be entitled for a further sum of Rs.15,500/- per cent. We allow the appeal and award such further enhancement of Rs.15,500/-. It is needless to mention that for the enhanced compensation to which the appellants become eligible by virtue of present judgment, the L.A.A./2425/08 4 appellants will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Section 23(1A), 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act. Appeal is allowed to the above extent but without any order as to costs. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb