IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL SATURDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1933 LA.App..No. 315 of 2011(U) -------------------------------------- [LAR.NO.134/2008 OF PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,KOTTAYAM] .................... APPELLANT/CLAIMANT: ----------------------------------- V.R.SIVAN, S/O.RAMAN, VAZHANILKUMPURAYIDATHIL, MULAKULAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.V.G.ARUN, SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR, SMT.V.P.SATHI. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM-686 001. 2. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, (LAND ACQUISITION), MUVATTUPUZHA VALLEY IRRIGATION PROJECT, KURUPPANTHARA, KOTTAYAM-686 603. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MUVATTUPUZHA VALLEY IRRIGATION PROJECT, DIVISION NO.IV, PIRAVOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 664. R1 & R2 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. C.R. SHYAMKUMAR. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Prv. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. HARILAL,JJ. .................................................................... L.A.A.NO.315 OF 2011 ................................................................... Dated this the 19th day of November, 2011. JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J. The claimant is the appellant. His property in Mulakulam village was acquired pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 28.1.2005 for the purpose of Muvattupuzha Valley Irrigation Project. The L.A Officer included the property in superior category and awarded land value at the rate of Rs.4,000/- per cent. The reference court on evaluating the evidence which consisted of Exts.A1,A2,R1,R2,C1 and C1(A) and the oral evidence of AW1 and Aw2 would refix the land value at Rs.12,125/-. In this appeal the ground urged is that the rate fixed by the reference court is grossly inadequate. 2. Sri. Shyam Kumar, learned Senior Government Pleader would draw our attention to LAA.No.291/2011 and submit that on the basis of that judgment there should be justification for refixing the land value at Rs.15,000/- per cent. Sri. Harikumar, learned counsel for the appellant/claimant submitted that Rs.15,000/- per cent was L.A.A.NO.315 OF 2011 : 2 : awarded to Smt. Mary George - the appellant in LAA.No.291/11 as Smt. Mary George's property was enjoying road frontage of only panchayat road whereas Rs.9,000/- was awarded to the appellant/claimant -Sri. Sivan whose property was situated 100 metres away from the PWD road. Having considered the submissions addressed at the bar, we are of the view that the appellant is not justified in insisting that he should be awarded proportionate increase based on the judgment in LAA.No.291/11. But we keep in mind the difference in the rates awarded by the L.A Officer to Smt. Mary George and the appellant. We allow the appeal and refix the value of the land under acquisition at Rs.22,000/- per cent. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. Parties will be entitled to all statutory benefits under Section23(2),23(1A) and 28. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. K. HARILAL, JUDGE. cl