IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2009 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1931 LA.App..No. 223 of 1999(A) -------------------------- LAR.29/1996 of SUB COURT, PAYYANNUR .................... APPELLANT(S)RESPONDENT: -------------- STATE OF KERALA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI RESPONDENT(S)/CLAIMANT: --------------- K.P.YUSUF, K.P. HOUSE, CHERUTHAZHAM, P.O. MANDUR (DIED) ADDL. R2. MARIYATHINTAKATH MARIYAM, MARIYATHINTAKATH, NEAR NETHAJI VAYANASALA, CHERUTHAZHAM, P.O.MUNDOOR, KANNUR 670 501. ADDL. R2. MARIYATHINTAKATH RIYAS (11 YEARS), MARIYATHINTAKATH, NEAR NETHAJI VAYANASALA, CHERUTHAZHAM, P.O.MUNDOOR, KANNUR 670 501. (ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 ARE IMPLEADED AS THE LRS OF THE DECEASED FIRST RESPONDENTS. VIDE ORDER DATED 19/1/2005 I,A, 1576/2004) THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 9 /6 /2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.No.223 OF 1999 ------------------------ Dated this the 9th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. We do not find any ground to interfere with the judgment of the reference court. Acquisition was for the purpose of establishing a fish market in Payyannur. Relevant section 4(1) notification was published on 4/4/1989. The land acquisition officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.7605/- per Are. The reference court refixed the land value at Rs. 20,995/- (corresponding to Rs.8500/- per cent). The claimant relied mainly on Ext.A1 judgment of the same court in another case. The court below for valid reason did not rely on Ext.A1. The court below rejected the basis documents also, since basis document, unlike the acquired property ,did not have frontage of the main road. Ultimately what the court below did was to rely on Ext.C1 commission report, which was to the effect that the property is situated in a very important area of the locality having nearness to a large number of institutions and to fix the market value doing some guess work. We feel that in the facts L.A.A..No.223/1999 2 and circumstances of the case, it is a good guess that has been made by the reference court. We do not find any warrant for interfering, particularly since we notice that the total stakes involved in the appeal is also not much. The appeal will stand dismissed, without any order as to costs. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE dpk L.A.A..No.223/1999 3 PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.No.223 OF 1999 ------------------------ JUDGMENT 9TH June 2009