IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1931 LA.App..No. 160 of 2010(D) -------------------------- LAR.82/1997 of SUB COURT, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT: ----------------------- K.P.NAFEESA, D/O.MOHAMMED, KURUPPATH, KONDOTTY P.O., ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.RAJESH KORMATH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM, CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM. 2. THE AIRPORT DIRECTOR, AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA, NATIOAL AIRPORT DIVISION, CALICUT AIRPORT, CALICUT AIRPORT P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. R1 BY SR. G.P. SRI.BASANT BALAJI R2 BY SR. ADV. SRI. N.N.SUGUNAPALAN SMT.T.N.GIRIJA THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. -------------------------------------------------------- LAA. No. 160 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T Pius C. Kuriakose, J. This appeal by the claimant pertains to acquisition of land in Nediyiruppu Village of Malappuram District for the purpose of expansion of runway of the Calicut Airport. As directed by us Smt. T.N.Girija, standing counsel has taken notice on behalf of the requisitioning authority, viz., Calicut Airport. We have heard the submissions of Sri.Rajesh R.Kormath, learned counsel for the Appellant and those of Sri.N.N.Sugunapalan, learned senior counsel for the requisitioning authority. We have also heard Sri.Basant Balaji, learned senior Govt. Pleader who has taken notice on behalf of the State. 2. The property under acquisition was included in Tak No.4 and the Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.6916/- per cent. The Reference Court in the LAA. No. 160 of 2010 - 2 - first instance enhanced the same to Rs.13,000/- per cent. The Requisitioning Authority preferred an appeal and the matter was remanded. Pursuant to the order of remand, the Reference Court passed the impugned judgment re- fixing the value at Rs.10,000/- per cent. 3. Sri.Rajesh Kormath, learned counsel for the appellant drew our attention to the common judgment of this Court in LAA. No. 911 of 2003 and connected cases dated 11-11-2009. The learned counsel submitted that under that common judgment for properties included by the L.A. Officer in Tak No.4, this court has re-fixed the value of holdings, the extent of which is below one acre at Rs.11,500/- per cent; but for holdings which are having an extent of more than 1 acre, 7.5% was deducted and the value was re-fixed at Rs.10,637-50. The learned counsel conceded that the extent of the property involved in the present appeal is more than one acre. At the same time, LAA. No. 160 of 2010 - 3 - drawing attention to the various items of evidence available in this case Sri.Rajesh R. Kormath insisted that there is every justification for re-fixing the value of the land under acquisition at Rs.12,000/- per cent. 4. Though the submissions of Mr.Rajesh R.Kormath were persuasive, we are not inclined to hold that the appellant in the present appeal is entitled for re-fixation of the value of the land under acquisition at Rs.12,000/-. Admittedly, the common judgment of this court in LAA. 911 of 2003 and connected cases has attained finality. The above judgment was delivered on a thorough re- appreciation of the elaborate evidence adduced by the parties in those cases. We follow the decision taken in that common judgment. When that is done, the market value that can be re-fixed for the properties in the present case is Rs.10,637-50. Accordingly, allowing the appeal we re-fix the value of the land under acquisition in this appeal at LAA. No. 160 of 2010 - 4 - Rs.10,637-50 per cent. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. The appellant will be entitled for all all statutory benefits admissible under Section 23(2), 23(1A) and Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act on the total enhanced compensation to which the appellant becomes eligible by virtue of this judgment. We clarify that the additional amount payable to the appellant under Section 23(1A) will be calculated for the period from 15-11-1993 till the date of the award. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE ksv/-