IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2011 / 8TH ASHADHA 1933 LA.App..No. 1312 of 2009 (C) --------------------------------- LAR.185/2007 of SUB COURT, PALA .................... APPELLANT(S)/CLAIMANT: ----------------------------- JOSE JOSEPH, S/O JOSEPH, PERUMBALLIL HOUSE, KONDOOR KARA, MELAMPARA, REP. BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, P.C. JOSEPH, PERUMBALLIL HOUSE, KONDOOR KARA, MELAMPARA. BY ADV. SRI.T.J.MICHAEL SRI.JOSE MATHEW (KAVALAKALAM) RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REP. BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.T.T.JOSEPH THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & N. K. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.1312 of 2009 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 29th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J This appeal is preferred by the claimant whose property in Lalam village lying within the limits of Pala Municipality was acquired pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 30/06/04 for the upgradation of Ettumanoor - Poonjar State Highway. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of ` 16,973/- per Are. The Reference Court on evaluating the evidence adduced by the parties re-fixed the land value at ` 50,000/- per Are. 2. In the appeal various grounds are raised challenging what is described as the gross inadequacy of the market value re-fixed. Having heard the submissions addressed before us by Sri.T.J.Michael, the learned counsel for the L. A. A. No.1312 of 2009 -2- appellant and Smt.T.T.Josephina, the learned Government Pleader and having taken into account our own judgment in L.A.A.1110/2009, we feel that the issue raised in this appeal is covered to a substantial extent by the above judgment. The above judgment also pertains to acquisition of land in the same village pursuant to the same notification. In fact, under the above judgment, the market value of the land has been re-fixed at ` 1,23,500/- per Are. As a matter of fact, it was a slightly higher rate that was given by the Land Acquisition Officer for the property under this acquisition than what was given to the property covered by L.A.A.1110/09. The appellant should be allowed only at least the rate that was given to the party in L.A.A.1110/09. Hence, we allow this appeal and re-fix the market value of the land at ` 1,23,500/- per Are (` 50,000/- per cent). The appellant will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Sections 23(2), 23(1A) and under Section 28 of the Land L. A. A. No.1312 of 2009 -3- Acquisition Act. However, while provision is made for interest under Section 28, Section will have due regard to the conditions imposed by this Court in C.M.Application No.1795/09. It should be ensured that those conditions are complied with and that the full court fee due on the appeal memo is remitted. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE N. K. BALAKRISHNAN JUDGE kns/-