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 23RD SEPTEMBER 2011 / 1ST ASWINA 1933 LA.App..No. 276 of 2010(D) ------------------------------ LAR.2/2003 of SUB COURT, HOSDRUG .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT ----------------------------- T.V.KARUTHAKUNHU, SON OF THANOTH VALAPPIL RAMAN, RESIDING AT PADNEKKAT, KANHANGAD VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.D.KRISHNA PRASAD SRI.D.NARENDRANATH SRI.T.P.ELDHOSE SMT.O.K.SANTHA SMT.P.L.MARY TREASA RESPONDENT(S): REFERRING OFFICER AND RESPONDENT ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR(LAND ACQUISITION), N.H., KANNUR. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, N.H.DIVISION, KANNUR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT.T.T.JOSEPHINA THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/09/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.276 of 2010 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 23rd day of September, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J The claimant is in appeal. His property in Kanhangad village situated at Padnekkad was acquired pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 05/04/2000 for the construction of a Railway Overbridge. The land was dry and the Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of ` 5,005/- per cent. Before the Reference Court the appellant relied on Exts.A3 to A6. Exts.A3 to A5 reflected a land value of ` 1,00,005/- per cent. While Ext.A6 another pre-notification document reflected a land value at ` 2,000/- per cent. The appellant took out a commission who inspected properties covered by Exts.A3 to A5. The learned Subordinate Judge discarded Exts.A3 to A5 on reasons which are good, according to us. The grievance of the appellant as voiced before us by Sri.D.Krishna Prasad, the learned L. A. A. No.276 of 2010 -2- counsel is that the court below did not rely on Ext.A6. According to Sri.Krishna Prasad the distance between Ext.A6 property and the property under acquisition was only 300 metres. He submitted that the property under acquisition was superior to Ext.A6 property. 2. Even though Sri.Krishna Prasad was very persuasive, we find that the learned Subordinate Judge has given a very good reason for not placing reliance on Ext.A6. As observed by the learned Subordinate Judge though a commission was taken out, the Commissioner was never taken to Ext.A6 property so that a comparative report could be obtained. Sri.Krishna Prasad would appeal to us for passing an order of remand. Though this request is opposed by Smt.T.T.Josephina, the learned Government Pleader, on considerations of justice we are inclined to accede to the above request, however incorporating conditions which will safeguard the interest of the Government. 3. The result of the above discussion is as follows:- The judgment and decree under appeal are set aside to L. A. A. No.276 of 2010 -3- the extent it pertains to the land value. That part of the award pertaining to the building value is confirmed. L.A.R.2/03 is remanded to the Subordinate Judge's Court, Hosdrug. The learned Subordinate Judge is directed to pass a revised award after giving opportunity to both sides to adduce evidence. It is open to the appellant to seek deputation of the Commissioner for inspection of Ext.A6 property so that a comparative report as to the advantages enjoyed by the acquired property and Ext.A6 property will come on record. The learned Subordinate Judge will pass the revised award on the basis of evidence already on record and evidence which comes to be on record. This remand will however, will be subject to the following conditions:- 4. If under the revised award to be passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, the appellant becomes eligible for more value than what is awarded to him under the impugned award such enhanced compensation will not carry interest otherwise admissible under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act during the period from 08/09/09 till the date L. A. A. No.276 of 2010 -4- of the revised award. There will be a further condition that the appellant will forfeit the full court fee paid on the appeal memo to the Government. The parties will enter appearance before the Reference Court on 24/10/11. The learned Subordinate Judge will expedite matters and pass revised award within four months thereafter. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE C. K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE kns/-