IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2010 / 27TH JYAISTHA 1932 LA.App..No. 802 of 2007(H) -------------------------- LAR.12/2004 of SUB COURT, VADAKARA .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT ---------------------- KOORINDAVIDA ABDUL KAREEM HAJI, S/O PAKRAN, P.O.KIZHAKKEKODAKKACHALIL, KUTTIADY, PIN-673508, VADAKARA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR(LA), KOYILANDY, VADAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE DIST. BY SRI.M.DINESH. SC ( KWA) ADV. SRI.J.KRISHNAKUMAR,SC,KWA. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/06/2010, ALONG WITH LAA NO. 802 OF 2007 & CONNECTED CASES THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.Nos. 802,804, 805, 864, 865, 877 & 1134 OF 2007 ------------------------ Dated this the 17h day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The claimants are the appellants in all these appeals. The cases pertain to acquisition of land for the purpose of water supply scheme at the instance of the Kerala Water Authority. The properties were in Kuttiady village and the acquisition was pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 20/1/2001. The properties were garden lands. The property involved in L.A.R.No.13/2004 corresponding to L.A.A. No.804/2007 was enjoying the direct frontage of the Vadakara - Wayanad Road. whereas the other properties were enjoying the frontage of only a panchayat road. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded value at the rate of Rs.3180/- per cent for lands under acquisition. Before the Reference Court, the claimants relied mostly on Ext.A1 document and reports Ext.X1 and X2 submitted by the commissioner. The commissioner in Ext.X2 recommended that L.A.A..No.802/2007 & others 2 the correct market value of the property will be Rs.17500/- per cent (a little more than the value of Rs.16,438/- per cent reflected in Ext.A1). The Reference Court, however, took the view that since the total extent covered by all these acquisition cases is very large and since the extent covered by Ext.A1 is only 3.65 cents, it is not safe to rely on Ext.A1 fully. However, relying on Ext.A1 itself to a certain extent, what the court below did was to refix the value of land involved in L.A.R. No.13/2004 at Rs.5,500/- per cent and to refix the value of lands involved in all other cases at Rs.5,000/- per cent. In these appeals, the claimants have raised various grounds contending that the market value determined by the Court below is grossly inadequate. 2. We have heard the submissions of Sri.M.Gopikrishnan Nambiar, learned counsel for the appellants/claimants and Sri.M.Dinesh, learned standing counsel for the Water Authority and Smt.R.Bindu, learned Government Pleader. 3. Mr.M.Gopikrishnan Nambiar would draw our attention to Ext.A1 and Exts. X1 and X2. According to him, the extent of land belonging to the various appeals were also small extents and L.A.A..No.802/2007 & others 3 hence the Court below was not justified in not relying on Ext.A1 for the reason that the total extent acquired from all the claimants altogether is a large one. According to him, Ext.X2 commission report was not objected to and hence the amount, as recommended by the commissioner at Rs.17,500/-, ought to have been awarded. 4. All the submissions of Sri.Gopikrishnan Nambiar were resisted by Sri.Dinesh learned Standing Counsel, who was supported in his submissions by Smt.Bindu learned Government Pleader. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. We have made a reappraisal of the evidence, particularly Ext.A1, Ext.X1 and X2. Ext. A1 document is a pre notification document. Of course, it pertains to only 3.65 cents of land. But, we notice that the extents belonging to the various appellants before us is also not much. At the same time, we feel that there is no justification for awarding to the appellants the same rates as reflected in Ext.A1 which is found to be a genuine transaction even by the learned Subordinate Judge. We feel that based on Ext.A1 itself and Exts.X1 and X2, more enhancement than what L.A.A..No.802/2007 & others 4 is granted by the Reference Court can be granted to the appellants. Keeping in mind all the inputs which should go in while determining the market value in land acquisition cases, we feel that for properties covered by L.A.R. No.13/2004 corresponding to L.A.A. No.804/2007, the market value of land under acquisition can be refixed at Rs.9,500/- per cent. 6. At the same time, we are of the view that the difference in the value between the properties in L.A.R. No.13/2004 and the properties in the other LAR cases ought to be more than what is fixed by the Court below. We refix the market value of the land involved in L.A.A. Nos. 802/2007,805/2007 864/2007, 877/2007, 865/2007 & 1134/2007 at Rs.8000/- per cent. 7. All the appeals are allowed to the above extent. The market value of the land in L.A.A. No.804/2007 is refixed at Rs.9500/- per cent. Market value of land in L.A.A. Nos. 802/2007, 805/2007,864/2007, 877/2007, 865/2007 & 1134/2007 is refixed at Rs.8000/- per cent. It is needless to mention that the appellants/claimants will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Section 23(2), 23(1A) and Section 28 of the Act on the total enhanced compensation to L.A.A..No.802/2007 & others 5 which they become eligible by virtue of this refixation. Parties are directed to suffer their respective costs. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM , JUDGE dpk