IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND JULY 2008 / 11TH ASHADHA 1930 LA.App..No. 1050 of 2008() -------------------------- LAR.296/2000 of ADDL.SUB COURT,KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT: RESPONDENT IN LAR ---------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI RESPONDENTS: CLAIMANTS IN LAR ----------------------------- 1. GOPALAKRISHNAN, S/O NEELAKANTAN, KOCHUMUZHANGODIYIL, KANDACHIRA, PARINADU VILLAGE. 2. VIJAYAMMA, W/O GOPALAKRISHNAN, S/O NEELAKANTAN, KOCHUMUZHANGODIYIL, KANDACHIRA, PARINADU VILLAGE. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/07/2008 ALONG WITH L.A..A.NO.1111/08,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON I.A.NO. 2367/08 IN L.A.A.NO.1050 OF 2008 DISMISSED 02-07-2008 Sd/-, PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE /True Copy/ PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.NOs.1050 & 1111 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 2nd day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT These appeals relate to acquisition in Panayam village for the purposes of Railways pursuant to a notification under Section 4(1) dated 13-05-1991. The land acquisition officer relying on the basis document awarded land value at the rate of Rs. 6,293/- per are. The reference court enhanced the land value to Rs. 10,000/- per are, thus granting enhancement at the rate of Rs. 1,500/- per cent. Before the reference court, the respondents Government did not adduce any evidence at all much less produce the basis document. The evidence on the side of the claimant consisted of a certified copy of the judgment in L.A.R. No. 105/95 as well as the certified copy of a sale deed. The learned Subordinate Judge did not place reliance on either the judgment or the sale deed; instead placing reliance on the oral evidence adduced by the claimants and taking into account the factors such as prevailing market value in the locality, learned Judge has granted the enhancements. LAA.No.1050/ & 1111 OF 2008 2 In my opinion it is an almost correct assessment of the market value of the acquired property at the relevant time which has been made by the learned Judge. The approach of the learned Subordinate Judge has been reasonable. I do not find any warrant for interference since the market value determined by the court is the value which would have been paid for the property by a willing purchaser to a willing vendor. More over, I find that the stakes involved in the appeal are relatively less. Both the appeals will stand dismissed in limine. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv. LAA.No.1050/ & 1111 OF 2008 2