IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2011 / 20TH JYAISHTA 1933 LA.App..No. 1140 of 2009(D) -------------------------------- LAR.47/1999 of ADDL.SUB COURT, NORTH PARAVUR .................... APPELLANT(S)/2ND RESPONDENT: -------------------------------------- THE SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY KALADY. BY ADV. SRI.ALAN PAPALI SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN SMT.DHANYA P.ASHOKAN RESPONDENT(S)/1ST RESPONDENT & CLAIMANTS: -------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 2. OUSEPH THOMAS VADAKKEPURATHAN HOUSE, KALADY. 3. MARIYAM ,W/O.THOMAS VADAKKEPURATHAN HOUSE, KALADY. ADV. SMT.ROSE MICHAEL FOR R2 & 3 GOVT. PLEADER SMT.P.N.SUMANGALA THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/06/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & N. K. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.1140 of 2009 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 10th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J The Sree Sankaracharya University, the Requisitioning Authority is in appeal. The properties under acquisition were wetlands and were included in category-4 by the Land Acquisition Officer. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of ` 2,839/- per Are. Under the impugned judgment the Reference Court has re-fixed the land value at ` 13,338/- per Are. It is seen from the judgment that the L.A Court has also awarded 30% of the total amount which had been awarded to the claimant towards value of improvements and buildings as further value of improvements and buildings. But this award of 30% is not seen reflected in the decretal portion of the judgment or in L. A. A. No.1140 of 2009 -2- the decree. 2. In this appeal the appellant mainly challenges the rate of market value re-fixed by the court as excessive. We have heard the submissions of Sri.Alan Papali, the learned counsel for the appellant and Smt.Rose Michael, the learned counsel for the respondents. Sri.Papali was supported in his submissions by Smt.Latha T. Thankappan, the learned senior Government Pleader. Our attention was drawn by Sri.Papali to various judgment of this Court by which this Court has re- fixed market value payable for the properties acquired in this acquisition project at the instance of the appellant/University. Our attention is drawn to the judgment of this Court in LAA.998/10 whereby this Court has re-fixed value of properties in category-1 at ` 50,300/- per Are. Having regard to that judgment and also the ratio which was maintained by the Land Acquisition Officer in his award between the values of properties in category-1 and in L. A. A. No.1140 of 2009 -3- category-4, we feel that there is justification for re-fixing the market value of the land involved in this appeal at ` 8,048/- per Are. Allowing this appeal we re-fix the market value of the land at ` 8,048/- per Are. We confirm the award of 30% of what was awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer towards value of improvements and value of buildings. 3. The appeal is allowed as above. For the entire re- fixed compensation, the claimants/respondents will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Sections 23(2), 23(1A) and under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act. Parties are directed to suffer their respective costs. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE N. K. BALAKRISHNAN JUDGE kns/- L. A. A. No.1140 of 2009 -4-