IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2009 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1931 LA.App..No. 54 of 2006() ---------------------------------- LAR.143/2001 of ADDL.SUB COURT, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT: ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, L.A., KANNUR. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.V.T.K.MOHANAN RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT: ------------------------ N. VIJAYAKUMAR NAMBIAR, `GOKUL', OPP. THAMA POST OFFICE, THANA, KANNUR THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, T.MURALEEDHARA MENON. ADV. MR.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON IA. NO.104/2006 IN LAA. NO.54/2006 DISMISSED 29/10/2009 SD/- PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE SD/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- L.A.Appeal No.54 of 2006 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of October, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose,J. The Government is in appeal. The land under acquisition was acquired pursuant to section 4(1) notification published on 1.11.1997 for the purpose of Chovva-Nadal Bye-Pass Road in Elayavoor Village. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.994/- per cent which was re-fixed under the impugned judgment to Rs.16,000/- per cent. 2. The learned Government Pleader, Mr.V.T.K.Mohanan drew our attention to other judgments of this Court in cases pertaining to acquisition for the same purpose and submitted that for properties acquired for the same purpose, for which higher land value had been awarded by the L.A.Officer, this Court has approved enhancement only up to Rs.12,500/- and Rs.7500/- respectively. The above submission of the learned Government Pleader is certainly correct, but on going LAA No.54 of 2006 2 through the impugned judgment, we find that the findings regarding market value have been entered by the learned subordinate judge on the basis of legal evidence which came on record. Exts.A1 to A3 were the title documents under which the land was purchased by the claimant. Those documents were executed more than two years prior to Section 4(1) notification and on an average, they revealed land value of Rs.9500/- per cent. The evidence of the claimant was to the effect that it was for the purpose of constructing a service station that these lands which were originally wet lands, were purchased. The Advocate Commissioner's report gives strong support to AW1's version that after purchasing the lands were developed considerably. It is submitted by Mr.Sreekumar Chelur, the counsel for the claimant that the proceedings under Section 45(A) of the Stamp Act were initiated under Exts.A1 to A3 and ultimately the market value of the land was fixed at Rs.11,000/- per cent. Taking that fact into account as well as the uncontroverted evidence of the claimant that Rs.3,000/- per cent was expended for developing the property at the time of Section 4(1) LAA No.54 of 2006 3 notification, we are of the view that re-fixation of land value at Rs.15,000/- per cent for this item of property was not unreasonable. The appeal is dismissed. No costs. This judgment will not be a precedent for any other case pertaining to acquisition for Chovva-Nadal Bye-pass. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE css/