IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 5TH OCTOBER 2009 / 13TH ASWINA 1931 LA.App..No. 29 of 2005() ---------------------------------- LAR.270/2000 of ADL.SUB COURT, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANTS: ------------------------ 1. CHEMMAYI MARIYAM, W/O. MUHAMMED, P.P. HOUSE, MEEZHALLUR AMSOM, THERUR DESOM, EDAYANNUR POST, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. CHEMMAYI SABITHA, D/O. MUHAMMED, P.P. HOUSE, MEEZHALLUR AMSOM, THERUR DESOM, EDAYANNUR POST, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. CHEMMAYI SAJITHA, D/O. MUHAMMED, P.P. HOUSE, MEEZHALLUR AMSOM, THERUR DESOM, EDAYANNUR POST, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS.MR.T.A.RAMADASAN MR.ANIL GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT: -------------------------- THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR FOR LAND ACQUISITION, FOR AIR PORT, KANNUR AT MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LATHA T.THANKAPPAN THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A No. 29 OF 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 5th day of October, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J The application for amendment has been allowed. Acquired property of the appellants is valued by the method of capitalization of income from fruit bearing trees standing on the property. Before the reference court, a last minute attempt was made by the appellants to have their compensation redetermined by adopting the method of land value. Learned Sub Judge noticed the land value re-fixed by him in other connected cases and observed that if land value method is adopted and the compensation is redetermined the same will only be lesser than the compensation awarded to the appellant by the Land Acquisition Officer adopting the method of capitalization of income from fruit bearing trees. 2. The point which is urged by Sri. George, learned counsel for the appellants is that the reference court has re-fixed the land value in several other connected cases at Rs.30,000/- and even Rs.4500/- per cent respectively. According to him if the market value of the land is fixed as Rs.30,000/- per cent or at any amount higher than Rs.2,500/- per cent, the appellants L.A.A No. 29 OF 2005. : 2 : will become entitled for much higher compensation than the compensation awarded to him by the Land Acquisition Officer which has been confirmed by the learned Sub Judge under the impugned judgment. 3. Smt.Latha T Thankappan, Sr. Government Pleader submitted that this court has approved the re-fixation of land value at Rs.2,500/- per cent. She submitted that against the fixation of market value at rates higher than Rs. 2,500/-, appeals are pending before this court. In reply, to the above submission, learned counsel for the appellants submits that, even if the compensation is determined by taking the market value of the land as Rs.2,500/-, what is awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer will be found to be less. 4. Having considered the rival submissions, we feel that an opportunity can be given to the appellant to have a compensation awarded to which he is eligible by adopting the land value method. However, since it is only before this court, that the appellant took decision to go on for the land value method, we are inclined to offer him such opportunity only on conditions. 5. The result is that the impugned judgment and decree are set aside. LAR No.270/2000 is remanded to the reference L.A.A No. 29 OF 2005. : 3 : court and the reference court is directed to permit the appellant to produce evidence showing the correct market value of the land under acquisition including other judgments of that court and this court. That court is directed to re-fix the total compensation to which the appellant is eligible on the basis of the evidence is concerned. Dispute regarding the correct extent acquired from the possession of the appellants will also be settled by the court by giving opportunity for adduction of evidence by the parties. The parties will enter appearance before the reference court on 31.12.2009. However, it is made clear that the enhanced compensation to which the appellant may become eligible by virtue of the revised judgment to be passed by the reference court, appellants will not be entitled to interest otherwise admissible under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act during the period from 31.5.2004 till 25.11.2008. Since the appellant is responsible for this order of remand, the 1/3rd court fee remitted will not be refunded. ( PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) (K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) jma