IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE THURSDAY, THE 13TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 22ND KARTHIKA 1930 LA.App..No. 97 of 2002() ------------------------ LAR.32/1996 of SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT ---------------------- 1. MEDAYIL KUTTAN (DIED) ERANHIKAL P.O., KOZHIKODE. ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 2. PARIMALA, W/O LATE KUTTAN AGED 60 YEARS 3. DEEPAK, S/O LATE KUTTAN AGED 36 YEARS 4. DIJU, S/O LATE KUTTAN AGED 35 YEARS 5. BINI, D/O LATE KUTTAN AGED 24 YEARS ALL RESIDING AT MEDAYIL HOUSE, P.O. ELATHOOR KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. Additional respondents impleaded as LR's of the deceased appellant vide order dated 4-11-2008 in I.A.No. 4608/08 BY ADV. SRI.P.K.RAMKUMAR SMT.ANITHA RAMKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------- THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR,LAND ACQUISITION, NATIONAL HIGH WAY (NO.1),KOCHIKODE. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LATHA THANKAPPAN THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.No. 97 OF 2002 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 13th day of November , 2008 JUDGMENT Heard Sri.P.K.Ramkumar, learned counsel for the appellant and Smt.Latha Thankappan, learned Government Pleader. Learned counsel for the appellant addressed me very strenuously and persuasively. Strong reliance was placed by him on the judgment of this court in L.A.A.No.838/01 by which this court confirmed the judgment in L.A.R. No. 206/98 on the files of the very same Subordinate Judge's Court. As requested by the learned counsel, I directed incorporation of the entire Judge's papers in L.A.A.No. 838/01. The records in that case reveal that the relevant section 4(1) notification therein was on 7-2-1994 which is some 10 months after the 4(1) notification in this case which is on 5/4/1993. I also find from the records that the properties involved in L.A.A. No. 838/01 were all dry lands. But it is seen that it was relying on Ext.A1 judgment in L.A.R.Nos. 322/96, 323/96 and 324/96 that the court became inclined to refix the land value. Under Ext.A1 value of wet lands had been refixed at LAA.No.97/02 2 Rs. 13,000/- per cent. It is not very clear from the records now available as to what exactly was the date of section 4(1) notification pertaining to Ext.A1 in L.A.R. No. 206/98. But I am of the view that it can be safely assumed that relevant 4(1) notification in Ext.A1 in L.A.R.No.206/98 was earlier even to the relevant 4(1) notification in this case. The acquired properties in this case, in Ext.A1 case and in L.A.R. No. 206/98 were all situated in Elathur village and the acquisition was also for the very same purpose i.e. for widening the National Highway. Probably these cases pertain to acquisition for different reaches of the same national highway. It was the submission of Sri.P.K.Ramkumar that in all subsequent cases a minimum of Rs. 11,000/- has been granted as value for wet lands in this village. 2. In the absence of materials, I am unable to accept the above submission. However, I feel that on the basis of materials available before me, i.e. the evidence in this case and the judgment in L.A.R.No.206/98 which has been confirmed by this court in L.A.A.No. 838/01, it is possible to make a correct guess as to what could have been the minimum market value of the acquired property. Making such LAA.No.97/02 3 a guess I refix the value of wet lands under acquisition at Rs. 10,500/- per cent. The appeal will stand allowed to that extent. The appellant will be entitled for all statutory benefits as has been allowed to him under the order of the trial court on the enhanced compensation. The parties will suffer their respective costs in this appeal. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv. LAA.No.97/02 4