IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 20TH MARCH 2009 / 29TH PHALGUNA 1930 LA.App..No. 1254 of 2008() -------------------------- LAR.3/2001 of PRL.SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT NO.1 ----------------------------- THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) OECF, KOZHIKODE. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS & RESPONDENT NO.2 ------------------------------------------ 1. NELLIKKAL SAROJINI, W/O.PERACHAN, PAYIMBRA (PO), KURUVATTOR. 2. THE PROJECT OFFICER (OECF), KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.THOMAS ANTONY FOR R1 SRI.BABU VARGHESE, SC, KWA FOR R2 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/03/2009, ALONG WITH L.A.A.1474/2008 & OTHERS THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.Nos.1254, 1474,1671 & 1803/2008 ------------------------ Dated this the 20th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. All these appeals pertain to acquisition of land for laying pipeline and construction of water tank for OECE, Kerala Water Authority. The property was in Kuruvattor Village of Kozhikode District. Relevant Section 4(1) notification was on 26/6/1998. The land acquisition officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.2321/- per Are. The claimants, being dissatisfied, facilitated a reference and the Sub Court in the first instant would refix the land value at Rs.5,000/- per cent. Being aggrieved, the claimants preferred appeals and this court considering the appeals remanded the matter to the reference court giving an opportunity to the claimants to take out a commission and substantiate before the reference court that there was no comparison between basis land and acquired land and also to get a report regarding the comparison of A1 property and the acquired property. After remand, commission was taken out and the commissioner filed his report Ext.C1. The commissioner was L.A.A..No.1254/2008 & others 2 examined as AW-3. Significantly, no additional counter evidence was adduced either by the Government or by the requisitioning authority. The learned Subordinate Judge would refix the land value at Rs.10,000/- per cent relying on the commissioner's report and the testimony of AW-3 apart from Ext.A1 sale document. 2.We have heard the submissions of learned Senior Government Pleader Sri.Basant Balaji for the appellants and Sri.Babu Varghese, learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala Water Authority and also those of Sri.Thomas Antony, learned counsel for the claimants. 3. The senior Government Pleader would assail the judgment of the reference court on the various grounds raised in these appeals. Sri.Babu Varghese would give strong support to the submissions of the Government Pleader. Sri.Thomas Antony would, however support the judgment of the reference court. He pointed out that the commission report was obtained pursuant to the directions in the earlier order passed by this court and the said report was proved by none other than Ext.A3 Commissioner. L.A.A..No.1254/2008 & others 3 3. We have anxiously considered the rival submissions and we have carefully gone through the full text of the impugned judgment. We are of the view that the learned Subordinate Judge was justified in refixing the land value of Rs.10,000/- per cent. After all, Ext.C1 report was taken pursuant to the direction of this court and that report was proved well before the reference court by AW-3. No further evidence was adduced either by the Government or by the requisitioning authority. According to us, it is more or less the correct market value of the property at the relevant time which was arrived at by the learned Judge. These appeals will accordingly stand dismissed inn limine. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE dpk