IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2009 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1931 LA.App..No. 325 of 2007() ------------------------- LAR.168/2003 of ADL.SUB COURT, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT ----------------------- KALLAMPLAKKAL BINOY, S/O. DEVASSIYA, BIBLE BHAVAN, VANIYAKKADU, P.O.MANNAM, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS --------------------------- 1. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR FOR LAND ACQUISITION, THALASSERY. 2. GENERAL MANAGER, TELECOM, KANNUR. ADV. SRI.MATHEWS K.PHILIP,SC, BSNL FOR R2 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.K.BABU FOR R1 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/03/2009 ALONG WITH L.A.A.NOs. 424, 430, 561, 588 & 589, 590 OF 2007 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.NOs. 325, 424, 430, 561, 588 & 589, 590 OF 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 25th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius.C.Kuriakose, J. L.A.A.Nos. 561, 588, 589, 590 of 2007 are appeals preferred by the requisitioning authority BSNL while L.A.A.No.424, 430 and 325 of 2007 are appeals preferred by the claimants. Impugned in these appeals is the common judgment in L.A.R.Nos. 168/03, 169/03, 170/03 and 171/03. We are informed that the claimant in L.A.R.No.170/03 corresponding to L.A.A.No.589/07 did not prefer any appeal for the reason that the extent involved is very small. The acquisition was for the construction of a telephone exchange for the BSNL at Perumpadavu in Thimiri village in Kannur district. The relevant Section 4(1) notification was published on 19/07/2000. 2. The land acquisition officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.2,441/- per cent and the evidence before the court below consisted of Exts.A1 to A10, Ext.X1 Commissioner's report and Ext.X1(a) plan submitted by the Commissioner, apart from the oral L.A.A.NOs. 325, 424, 430, 561, 588 & 589, 590 of 2007 2 testimonies AWs 1 and 2 - claimant and the Advocate Commissioner on the side of the claimant and RW1, an officer of BSNL on the side of the BSNL. The learned Subordinate Judge found and rightly so in our opinion, that the only document which can have some relevance is Ext.A6. Ext.A6 was copy of the sale deed dated 15/11/1999 revealing a land value of Rs. 10,000/- per cent. It was seen on the basis of the Commissioner's report that Ext.A6 property was situated very near to the acquired property. The Commissioner reported that the acquired property was at a distance of just 50 feet from Taliparamba - Perumpadavu public road and only 150 meters from Perumpadavu Bazar. Learned Subordinate Judge found that though the acquired property did not have direct frontage of Thaliparamba - Perumpadavu road, it had the frontage of a sufficiently wide road and that the acquired property was situated very much in the town area of Perumpadavu. Considering the superiority of the property covered by Ext.A6, the learned Subordinate Judge made a deduction of 25% over the value revealed in Ext.A6 and fixed the land value of the acquired property at Rs. 7,500/-. In the appeals preferred by the requisitioning L.A.A.NOs. 325, 424, 430, 561, 588 & 589, 590 of 2007 3 authority, they assail the finding of the learned Subordinate Judge that the market value of the property at the relevant time is Rs. 7500/- per cent. In the appeals preferred by the claimants what they contend is that the learned Subordinate Judge should have awarded the value revealed in Ext.A6 towards the market value of the lands under acquisition. We have heard the submissions of Sri.P.Narayanan, learned counsel for the appellant/claimants and Sri.Mathews.K.Philip, learned standing counsel for the appellant/requisitioning authority. Learned counsel drew our attention to the Commissioner's report as well as to the plan submitted by the Commissioner. We were also taken through the impugned judgment and also the salient portions of the evidence which came on record before the court below. We have anxiously considered the rival submissions addressed at the Bar in the light of those items of evidence to which our attention was drawn to. It is true that the acquired property unlike Ext.A6 property did not have the direct frontage of Perumpadavu- Thaliparamba road. But at the same time, the fact that the distance between the acquired property and the L.A.A.NOs. 325, 424, 430, 561, 588 & 589, 590 of 2007 4 public road was just 50 feet cannot be gainsaid. Though the acquired property did not enjoy the frontage of that main road, it did enjoy the direct frontage of a sufficiently wide road leading to the said main road. The nature of the property as reported by the Commissioner was similar to the property covered by Ext.A6. We feel that barring the circumstance that the acquired property did not have direct frontage of Perumpadavu- Thaliparamba road, in all other respects acquired property and Ext.A6 property were similar. The learned Subordinate Judge was certainly justified in not awarding the value reflected in Ext.A6 to the acquired property. At the same time, we feel that the correct percentage of deduction to be made on the value covered in Ext.A6 is not 25%, but is 20%. In the above view of the matter, we set aside the judgment and decree and refix the market value of the acquired property at Rs. 8,000/- per cent. The appeals preferred by the claimants are allowed to the above limited extent. Appeals preferred by the requisitioning authority will stand dismissed. It is needless to mention that the claimants will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Section 23(2), 23(1A) and Section 28 of the Land L.A.A.NOs. 325, 424, 430, 561, 588 & 589, 590 of 2007 5 Acquisition Act on the enhanced compensation to which they become entitled by virtue of this judgment. Parties are directed to suffer their costs in these appeals. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE sv. L.A.A.NOs. 325, 424, 430, 561, 588 & 589, 590 of 2007 6