IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2011 / 1ST MAGHA 1932 LA.App..No. 75 of 2009 -------------------------- LAR.46/2006 of SUB COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA .................... APPELLANT(S)/CLAIMANTS: ------------------------------- 1. SASIDHARAN NAIR 57, YEARS, S/O.KUTTAPPAN NAIR, R/AT THAYYIL POOJAYIL, KALPUZHA MURI, KULANADA, REP. BY THE P/AT.HOLDER SOBHA SASIDHARAN NAIR. 2. SOBHA SASIDHARAN NAIR, AGED 49 YEARS, W/O.SASIDHARAN NAIR, R/AT.THAYYIL POOJAYIL, KAIPUZHA MURI, KULANADA, BY ADV. SRI.ANIL S.RAJ SMT.K.N.RAJANI SRI.RADHIKA RAJASEKHARAN P. SMT.ANILA PETER RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KSTP, KOTTARAKARA DIVISION. SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LATHA T. THANKAPPAN THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/01/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & N. K. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.75 of 2009 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 21st day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J The claimant is in appeal. His property in Kulanada village together with structures (compound wall, gate and water tank) was acquired for the purpose of expansion of the Kottarakkara - Adoor limb of the M.C. Road. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.54,476/- per Are. He awarded structure value of Rs.18,608/-. In this appeal, there is claim for enhanced land value, enhanced structure value and also for injurious affection. But as regards claim for injurious affection what we notice is that those claims are in respect of injuries sustained by the appellants as a result of the road construction work undertaken long after the award was L. A. A. No.75 of 2009 -2- passed. We feel that the claim for injurious affection on the basis of road construction undertaken much after the award will constitute at best a separate cause of action. If the appellants have grievance, it is for the appellants to initiate original proceedings for recovery of compensation regarding that aspect. Coming to the question of land value, we find that Ext.A2 was the only document available. The court below rightly found that the acquired property was superior to Ext.A2 property and gave to the appellant value higher than the value reflected in Ext.A2 i.e. as against Rs.1,50,000/- per Are reflected in Ext.A2, the appellant was given Rs.2 lakhs per Are. But as regards the structure value, no enhancement was granted. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellants and those of the learned Government Pleader, we feel that on a more correct assessment of the evidence, there is justification for re-fixing the value of lands under acquisition L. A. A. No.75 of 2009 -3- at Rs.2,10,000/- per Are. Thus, awarding to the appellants Rs.10,000/- per Are more than what is awarded under the impugned judgment, we do so. Same way in the case of structure value also according to us, there is justification for awarding a further amount of Rs.7,400/- to the appellants. We award that amount also. The appeal is allowed to the above extent only. The appellants will be entitled for all statutory benefits also. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE N. K. BALAKRISHNAN JUDGE kns/-