IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 14TH JUNE 2010 / 24TH JYAISTHA 1932 LA.App..No. 222 of 2010() ------------------------- LAR.36/2008 of III ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANTS ----------------------- 1. MARY, W/O.ROBERT (LATE), KOTTEPARAMBIL HOUSE, IDAYAKUNNAM, KANAYANNUR TALUK EDAPPALLY (N). 2. SHEENA, D/O.LATE ROBERT, KOTTEPARAMBIL HOUSE, IDAYAKUNNAM, KANAYANNUR TALUK, EDAPPALY (N). 3. SHIJI, D/O.LATE ROBERT, KOTTEPARAMBIL HOUSE, IDAYAKUNNAM, KANAYANNUR TALUK, EDAPPALLY (N). 4. SHEEBA,D/O.LATE ROBERT,KOTTEPARAMBIL HOUSE,IDAYAKUNNAM,KANAYANNUR TALUK,EDAPPALLY (N). (CLAIMANTS REP.BY P/A HOLDER M.R.BABU,S/O.RAPHEL, AGED 36,MADATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE,PERUMBALLOOR KARA, ARAKUZHA VILLAGE,MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK,ERNAKULAM DT.) BY ADV. SRI.E.D.GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (L.A.), NH.NO.I, KAKKANAD. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NH (B) DIVSION, KODUNGALLUR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.R.BINDU THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- LAA. No. 222 of 2010 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Claimant is in appeal. His land in Edappally North Village was acquired for the purpose of NH 17 pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 14-3-2002. The land acquisition officer fixed land value at the rate of Rs.1,26,000/- per Are. Before the reference court the appellant produced Exts.A1 judgment and A2 sale deed. The Court below did not place any reliance on A2 sale deed on the reason that the Advocate Commissioner was not asked to compare A2 property and the acquired property. But reliance was placed to a certain extent on A1 judgment and land value was re-fixed at Rs.1,76,400/- per Are, thus granting enhancement by 40% over what was awarded by the L.A.O. 2. Various grounds have been raised assailing the judgment of the Reference Court and Sri.E.D.George, learned counsel for the appellant addressed arguments on LAA. 222/09 -2- the basis of all those grounds. The submissions of Mr.George were resisted by Smt.R.Bindu, learned Govt. Pleader. Having gone through the evidence, we feel that the court below was not justified in not giving proportionate increase based on A1 judgment. Under A1, for properties included in a different category enhancement has been given by 50%. We feel that the appellants ought to have been granted atleast so much of enhancement. Hence we allow the appeal to the extent of re-fixing market value at Rs.1,89,000/- per Are. The appellants will be entitled to all statutory benefits on the total enhanced compensation to which they become eligible by virtue of this judgment. The parties are directed to suffer their respective costs. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) (C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE) ksv/-