IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE THURSDAY, THE 4TH DECEMBER 2008 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 LA.App..No. 2312 of 2008() -------------------------- LAR.109/2005 of PRL.S.C.,THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT NO.1 ----------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REP.BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANTH BALAJI RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT & RESPONDENT NO.2 ----------------------------------------- 1. K.M.RAMACHANDRAN, S/O.LATE NANU NAIR, SINDHU NIVAS,M.G.ROAD KALLUR, MATTANNUR.P.O. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KWA WSP,KANNUR. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,J. ------------------------ L.A.A.No.2312 OF 2008 ------------------------ Dated this the 4th day of December, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal by the Government pertains to the acquisition in Kolari Village for the purpose of LIC Aided Water Supply Scheme of Kerala Water Authority pursuant to notification under Section 4 (1) published on 23/10/2002. The land acquisition officer awarded the land value at the rate of Rs.1,930/- per cent relying on Ext.B1 basis document. Before the court below the evidence consisted of oral testimony of the first respondent claimant as AW1 and Exts.A1 and A2. Exts.A1 and A2 are respectively copies of the decree and judgment in L.A.R. No. 88/04 of the same court. On the side of the Government, the evidence consisted only of Ext.B1. Ext.A2 judgment was in respect of acquisition of another item of property pursuant to the very same notification and in that way had considerable probative value. Ext.A2 related to garden land while the property under acquisition in this case was wet land. Under Ext.A2 reference court has fixed the land value at Rs.10,000/-. L.A.A..No.2312/2008 2 What the court below did was to give proportionate increase and to refix the land value for wet land at Rs.7,500/-. 2. The submission of the learned Government Pleader before me was that the court below was not justified in fixing the value of wet land as 75% of the value fixed for the garden land and that the same was not proper. I do notice some merit in the above submission of the learned Government Pleader. However, I find that the enhancement which was given to the party ultimately is only around Rs.1,100/- per cent. The property was situated within the limits of the Mattannur Municipal town. Ext.B1 document reflected the land value of Rs.1,930/-. Ext.B1 property did not have any road access unlike the property under acquisition which had road access. Therefore, on the basis of Ext.B1 itself some increase could have been given. The total stakes involved in this appeal is not much. For all the above reasons, I am not inclined to admit this appeal. The appeal will stand dismissed in limine. (PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE) dpk