IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2008 / 29TH SRAVANA 1930 LA.App.No.1256 of 2005 ---------------------------- LAR.274/1998 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT/CLAIMANT: -------------------------- P. GEETHA, ABALATHINKARA VEEDU, ATTIPARA VILLAGE, KAZHAKKOOTTAM, MENAMKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.VIJAYAN SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TRIVANDRUM. 2. ELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGY PARK (KERALA), KARIAVATTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MOHAMMED ANZAR FOR R1 SRI. P.A. AHAMMED, SC, TECHNO PARK. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/08/2008, ALONG WITH L.A.A.922/2007 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. ------------------------------------------- L.A.A. No. 1256 OF 2005, L.A.A.Nos.922, 1106, 1251, 1278 & 1778 OF 2007 AND L.A.A.No.78 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of August, 2008. J U D G M E N T Harun-Ul-Rashid, J. C.M.Appln.Nos.1063, 1294, 1461, 1485, 2169 of 2007 and 65 of 2008: These are applications for condonation of delay in filing the appeals. 2. L.A.A.Nos.922, 1106, 1251 and 1278 of 2007 are filed by the State against the judgment and decree passed by the Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram in L.A.R.Nos. 110, 270, 282 and 103 of 1998 respectively. L.A.A.Nos.1256/05, 1778/07 and 78/08 are filed by the claimants in L.A.R.Nos.274, 163 and 117 of 1998 respectively aggrieved by the fixation of land value by the same court. 3. Small extents of land situated in Kazhakuttom- Menamkulam and Attipra villages are acquired for Electronics Techno Park. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 05.04.1994. Properties under L.A.A. No.1256/05 & conn. cases 2 acquisition for the use of Electronic Techno Park were classified as Category Nos.1 to 15. Several other connected cases were also disposed of by the reference court. 4. In L.A.R.No.274/98, Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.46,510/- per Are and the reference court refixed and enhanced the same at Rs.60,463/- per Are by granting 30% enhancement. Similarly, in L.A.R.No.110/98, Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.11,812/- and Rs.4,154/- per Are for different extents of land in different survey numbers and the reference court refixed the same at Rs.15,356/- and Rs.5,400/- per Are respectively by granting enhancement at the rate of 30%. 5. In L.A.R.No.270/98, Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.15,750/- per Are and the reference court refixed and enhanced the same at Rs.20,475/- per Are. Similarly, in L.A.R.No.282/98, Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.11,380/- per Are and the reference court refixed and enhanced the same at Rs.14,794/- per Are. 6. In L.A.R.No.103/98, Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.11,812/- per Are and the reference L.A.A. No.1256/05 & conn. cases 3 court refixed and enhanced the same at Rs.15,355/- per Are. Similarly, in L.A.R.No.163/1998, Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.12,644/- per Are and in L.A.R.No.117/98, Land Acquisition Officer fixed land value at the rate of Rs.11,812/- per Are. In both cases also, reference court has granted 30% enhancement. 7. In L.A.A.Nos.1256/05, 1778/07 and 78/08 filed by the claimants, the claim is for additional compensation over and above the value fixed by the reference court. The court below, for valid reasons, did not rely upon Exhibit A1 document to fix market value of the property. Regarding categorization also, the court examined the question and held that from the notes to award it is seen that the wet converted dry lands lie behind the property adjacent to the National Highway and therefore, included in the 9th and 10th category. Considering the location of the property behind National Highway, reference court rightly held that the categorization made by the Land Acquisition Officer is correct and can be accepted. 8. Taking into account the location of the properties near to National Highway and its potential value, the reference court L.A.A. No.1256/05 & conn. cases 4 rightly held that the value awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer is not fair and according to the learned Sub Judge, the just value for the properties is to give 30% enhancement. We have in all the connected cases examined the question as to whether the land value fixed by the court below is just and reasonable. We find in those related cases also that the refixation of land value at the rate of 30% over and above the value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer is just and reasonable. In the result, the nominal enhancement at the rate of 30% over and above the value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer is just and reasonable. We find no reason to interfere with the decree passed by the reference court. Therefore, the applications for condonation of delay and the appeals are dismissed. All the interlocutory applications for stay are dismissed. KURIAN JOSEPH JUDGE HARUN-UL-RASHID JUDGE smp L.A.A. No.1256/05 & conn. cases 5 KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. L.A.A. Nos.1256 OF 2005, 922, 1106, 1251, 1278 & 1778 OF 2007 & L.A.A.No.78 OF 2008 J U D G M E N T 20.08.2008