IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JANUARY 2008 / 26TH POUSHA 1929 LA.App. No. 597 of 2005(D) & CROSS OBJECTION 36 OF 2007 ------------------------------------ LAR.178/2002 of ADDL.SUB COURT,KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT : -------------- STATE OF KERALA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA. RESPONDENT/ CLAIMANT: ----------------- THOMAS, S/O.MANI, KOZHUPPANKUTTIYIL, MARAMGOLI KARA, NJEEZHOOR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.PETER ISAAC SRI.C.V.JOHNY THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. -------------------------------------------- L.A.A. No. 597 OF 2005 & Cross Objection No. 36 OF 2007 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of January, 2008. J U D G M E N T Kurian Joseph, J. The State as well as the claimant are aggrieved by the fixation of land value by the reference court. Acquisition is for Muvattupuzha Valley Irrigation Project, for Mulakkulam Branch Canal. Exhibits A2 and A3, judgments in L.A.R.Nos.54 and 57 of 1998, are in respect of acquisition for the very same purpose, covered by 1995 notification whereas in this case, acquisition is covered by 1999 notification. 2. It is seen from the judgment that the reference court has refused to follow the value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer in Exhibits A2 and A3 on the only ground that there was a steep decrease in the land value all over Kerala in the year 1999. Apart from such a bald statement, we do not find any evidence regarding such decrease. L.A.A. 597/05 & C.O. 36/07 2 3. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the claimant, the settled legal position is that the land value should be fixed at 10% to 15% increase every year. Be that as it may, since there is apparently no dispute as to the similarity and comparability of the properties covered by Exhibits A2 and A3, we are of the view that it is only just, fit and proper that the claimant in this case also is granted the same land value at Rs.17,595/- per Are instead of Rs.15,371/- per Are with 60% enhancement as has been done in all similar cases. The claimant shall also be entitled to all statutory benefits including interest on solatium. In the result, L.A.A.No.597/2005 is dismissed and the cross objection is partly allowed holding that the cross objector shall be entitled to land value refixed at Rs.28,152/- per Are. The cross objector shall also be entitled to all statutory benefits including interest on solatium. KURIAN JOSEPH JUDGE HARUN-UL-RASHID JUDGE smp