IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 27TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 5TH ASWINA 1933 LA.App..No. 314 of 2011() ------------------------- LAR.51/2008 of SUB COURT, PALA .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT ---------------------- K.U.THOMAS,KUNNATHUTHARAPPIL, MARANGATTUPALLY PO,REP.BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER K.JOHN. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.HARIDAS RESPONDENT(S/respondent): --------------- STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,KOTTAYAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.T.T.JOSEPHINA THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.No. 314 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 27th day of September, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. This appeal by the claimant pertains to acquisition of land near to Kurichithanam junction for the purpose of widening of Pala - Kozha road and Pala - Uzhavoor road. The acquisition was in the year 2006 and the Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.5027/- per Are. The Reference Court would refix the land value relying on the basis document itself at Rs.83,333/- per Are. 2. This appeal is preferred claiming more land value as well as more compensation towards the building which existed on the property. We may at the very outset observe that we are not at all impressed by the claim for enhancement in the building value. It is relying on Ext.A1 sale deed that the appellant claims more land value. Ext.A1 is a document executed four years prior to Section 4(1) notification. The value as per Ext.A1 taking LAA No.314/2011 2 into account addition of 25% for passage of four years time will be around of Rs.1,28,000/- per Are. Ext.A1 is discarded by the court below on the reason that Ext.A1 is situated nearer to the Maragattupally junction, which is certainly a very important junction on the road in question. But, the submission of Sri. P.C.Haridas learned counsel for the appellant was that the acquired property was more valuable as the same was enjoying the frontage of two main roads. Ext.A1 property has frontage of a Panchayat road only though it was nearer to Maragattupally junction. 3. Even though submissions of Mr.Haridas were resisted by the learned Government Pleader, having gone through the impugned judgment, we feel that the court below could have relied on Ext.A1 to a certain extent and granted more than what is granted under the impugned judgment. We are of the view that on a reappraisal of the evidence including Ext.A1, the market value of the land can be refixed at Rs.1 Lakhs per Are. 4. We allow this appeal to the extent of refixing the value of the land under acquisition at Rs.1,00,000/- per Are. In all other respects the lower court's judgment and decree will stand LAA No.314/2011 3 confirmed. The appellant will be entitled for statutory benefits admissible under Section 23 (2), 23(1A) and Section 28 of the Act. However, while decree is drafted and the provision is made for interest, the Section will have due regard to the conditions imposed by this court in its order dated 13/6/2011 in C.M.Appln. No. 720/2011. Decree copy will be issued to the appellant only after ensuring that those conditions have been complied with and also that full court fee payable on the appeal memorandum is remitted. Parties are directed to suffer their respective costs. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE. dpk LAA No.314/2011 4 LAA No.314/2011 5 PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------ C.M.Appln. 720 of 2011 in L.A.A.No. 814 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of June, 2011 O R D E R Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Delay is condoned subject to the following conditions; i). The appellant pays a sum of Rs.2,000/- to the Government through the office of the Advocate General within ten days and produce receipt. ii). The appellant pays a sum of Rs.1,000/- to the High Court Legal Services Committee within the same time limit and produce receipt. Iii). In case the appeal is allowed and the appellant becomes eligible for enhanced compensation such enhanced compensation will not carry interest otherwise admissible under Section 28 of the Act during the period of 176 days condoned by this order. LAA No.314/2011 6 Annex a copy of this order to the judgment to be passed in the appeal. The Registry will send up the appeal for admission once receipts against payment of the above amounts are noticed. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE dpk