IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 6TH OCTOBER 2009 / 14TH ASWINA 1931 LA.App..No. 358 of 2007(D) ------------------------------- LAR.19/2001 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT -------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS/2ND RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------------------- 1. AMBIKA KUMARI.S., NILAVERA, MRA-4, MANNAMMOOLA, PEROORKADE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. K.SASIDHARAN, NILAVARA, MRA-4, MANNAMMOOLA, PEROORKADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CITY CORPORATION BUILDING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.V.SANTHARAM FOR R.1,2 SRI.ANTO THOMAS FOR R.1,2 SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R3 SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR FOR R3 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/10/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.358 of 2007 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 6th day of October, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J Even though Sri.Basant Balaji, the learned Senior Government Pleader addressed us strenuously and he was supported in all his submissions by Sri.P.K.Manoj Kumar, the learned Standing Counsel for the Requisitioning Authority, we are of the view that the rate granted under the impugned judgment can be approved. The property was in Peroorkkada village and was enjoying the direct frontage of the road starting from Sasthamangalam junction to Vattiyoorkkavu. The distance between the acquired property and Sasthamangalam junction was less than L. A. A. No.358 of 2007 -2- one kilometre. Exts.A1 and A2 documents, according to us, were rightly relied on. It could be discerned from the recitals in Exts.A1 and A2 themselves that the acquired property was superior to the properties covered by those documents. We are of the view that it is more or less the correct market value of the property at the relevant time (Rs.1 lakh per Are), the date of Section 4(1) notification, which has been arrived at by the Reference Court under the impugned judgment. The appeal will stand dismissed. No costs. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE K. SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE kns/-