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 28TH JULY 2011 / 6TH SRAVANA 1933 LA.App..No. 926 of 2008(B) ------------------------------ LAR.29/2002 of SUB COURT, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT(S): 2ND RESPONDENT -------------------------------------- AIRPORT DIRECTOR, CALICUT AIRPORT, CALICUT AIRPORT P.O. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.S.SUJIN RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT & IST RESPONDENT IN LAR --------------------------------------------------------------- * 1. KOTTAPALAKUDATH KHADEEJA, D/O.AREEKKAM EESSA, D/O.MOHAMMED HAJI, KURUPATH KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. [CORRECTED] 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, MALAPPURAM. *[ADDRESS OF R1 IS CORRECTED AS “KOTTAPPALAKKUDATH KADEEJA, W/O AREEKKAN EESSA, D/O MOHAMMED HAJI, NEDIYIRUPPU, NEDUMPPALLY HOUSE, KUNNUMANGALAM (PO) VENGARA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT AS PER ORDER DATED 16/07/08 ON I.A.2825/08] ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR FOR R1 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/07/2011, A/W L.A.A.968/08 & CON. CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. Nos.926, 927, 952 & 968 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 28th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J All these appeals are preferred by the Requisitioning Authority, the Airport Director, Calicut Airport, Calicut. The acquisition was for the extension of Run Way 28 end of Calicut Airport pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 05/05/99. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value uniformly at the rate of ` 5,547/- per cent. The Reference Court would re-fix the same at ` 8,000/- per cent. The claimants relied on Exts.A1 and A2. The learned Subordinate Judge after making a thorough and critical analysis of Exts.A1 and A2 came to the conclusion that neither Ext.A1 nor Ext.A2 are reliable. Ext.A2 was noticed to be post notification document and discarded on that reason also. After taking the view that Exts.A1 and A2 are not relevant what the learned Sub Judge has done is to rely on L. A. A. No.926/08 & con. cases -2- the basis document itself. It was noticed that the Land Acquisition Officer had not awarded the full value reflected in the basis document but has deducted 50% of the value. The learned Sub Judge found that so much of deduction was not warranted. The percentage of deduction was reduced considerably and this was how the value of ` 8,000/- per cent was arrived at. 2. In these appeals the Requisitioning Authority has raised several apparently serious grounds assailing what they described as the excessiveness of the compensation. Sri.N.N.Sugunapalan, the learned senior counsel for the Requisitioning Authority addressed extensive arguments based on all those grounds. Sri.Sugunapalan was supported in all this submissions by Smt.T.T.Josephina, the learned Government Pleader. The submissions of Sri.Sugunapalan were all opposed by Sri.Babu S. Nair, the learned counsel for the claimants. He submitted that in cases pertaining to acquisition of land in the same village for the same Requisitioning Authority pursuant to earlier notification, this L. A. A. No.926/08 & con. cases -3- Court has approved re-fixation of land value at rates higher than the rate of ` 8,000/- per cent. Having given our anxious consideration to the rival submissions addressed and having scanned the judgment of the Reference Court, we are unable to agree with the learned counsel for the Requisitioning Authority and the Government Pleader that the rate of ` 8,000/- per cent fixed by the Reference Court under the impugned award is excessive. we dismiss all these appeals, however without any order as to costs. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE C. K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE kns/-