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 23RD FEBRUARY 2010 / 4TH PHALGUNA 1931 LA.App..No. 328 of 2009(B) ------------------------------- LAR.78/2005 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS ----------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NH DIVISION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI (SR.) RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS ---------------------------------- 1. M.MUHAMMED HUSSAIN, RESIDING AT AMAL GARDENS, AGED 49,TC 20/2422, MUZAIVANIKUNNU,PUNALOOR. 2. BUSHRA KAREEMA,AGED, 48 YEARS, TC 20/738,HOUSE NO.48, KALLARAKKAL,SOORIYA NAGAR, MALARANOOR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. MOZIN,AGED 44 YEARS, RESIDING AT TC 20/738,HOUSE NO.48, KALLARAKKAL,SOORIYA NAGAR, MALARANOOR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. K.M.KAMALUDEEIN,AGED 49,TC 20/738, HOUSE NO.48,KALLARAKKAL,SOORIYA NAGAR, MALARANOOR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. L.A.A.328/09 -2- 5. N.NASOONA,AGED 37 YEARS,TC 20/738, HOUSE NO.48,KALLARAKKAL,SOORIYA NAGAR, MALARANOOR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. N.BEEMA,AGED 34,TC 20/738, HOUSE NO.48,KALLARAKKAL,SOORIYA NAGAR, MALARANOOR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ FOR R1 TO R6 SRI.MOHAMMED SADIQUE.T.A FOR R1 TO R6 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.328 of 2009 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J Government is in appeal. Acquisition was of property in Thycaud village. The actual purpose of acquisition was widening of the road from Karamana to Killippalam Reach-III. In the memorandum of appeal as well as the judgment impugned under appeal, the purpose is referred to as widening of the road from Kovalam-Mukkola Reach-I. We are convinced on a perusal of the award filed and especially, the Mahazar that the acquisition was for widening of the road from Karamana to Killippalam. L. A. A. No.328 of 2009 -2- 2. Having taken into account, the other relevant judgments including the judgments in LAA Nos.2021/08, 1377/08 and 234/2009, we are of the view that the market value of the land under acquisition in this case has to be re-fixed at Rs.6,10,000/- per Are making slight reduction from the value fixed by the Reference Court. 3. The question to be considered now is as to what is the correct compensation payable for building which existed on the property in question. It is seen from the judgment that the learned Subordinate Judge has almost completely relied on the Commissioner's report Ext.A1 and valuation report Ext.A1(a) submitted by AW2 and AW3. The question to be decided is whether the same can be approved. 4. We have scanned the reports submitted by L. A. A. No.328 of 2009 -3- Sri.R.C.Nair whose credentials as an expert in the field appear to be very good. We notice that while arriving at the market value of the building, the valuer has deducted the proper percentage of depreciation to be deducted in terms of the Division Bench decision of this Court in State of Kerala v. Kuruvila (2005(3) KLT, 580). Thus, according to us, the valuation report submitted by the expert appears to be fairly correct. 5. We notice another point. Even though various grounds have been raised in this memorandum of appeal, all the grounds are directed against the re-determination of the market value of the land; no specific ground is raised regarding the correctness of the compensation awarded towards the value of the building which existed in the property. For all L. A. A. No.328 of 2009 -4- these reasons, we are of the view that the compensation awarded by the court below towards value of the buildings is to be sustained. The appeal, therefore, stands allowed only to the extent of re-fixing the market value of the land at Rs.6,10,000/- per Are. In all other respects, the appeal stands dismissed. It is needless to mention that the respondents will be entitled for all statutory benefits on the total enhanced compensation to which they become eligible by virtue of this judgment. Parties are directed to suffer their respective costs. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE C. K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE kns/-