IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 26TH JUNE 2008 / 5TH ASHADHA 1930 LA.App..No. 827 of 2005() ------------------------- LAR.35/2002 of SUB COURT, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT: ----------- 1. THERATH KAIPRATH YESODA, D/O.MADHAVI, RAM NIVAS, NEAR MAX NURSERY, WEST TALAP ROAD, TALIKAVU BLOCK, KANNUR II. 2. THERATH KAIPRATH VASANTHY, D/O.MADHAVI, RAM NIVAS, NEAR MAX NURSERY, WEST TALAP ROAD, TALIKAVU BLOCK, KANNUR II. 3. THERATH KAIPRATH RAJAN, S/O.MADHAVI, RAM NIVAS, NEAR MAX NURSERY, WEST TALAP ROAD, TALIKAVU BLOCK, KANNUR II. 4. THERATH KAIPRATH RAMANI, D/O.MADHAVI, RAM NIVAS, NEAR MAX NURSERY, WEST TALAP ROAD, TALIKAVU BLOCK, KANNUR II. 5. THERATH KAIPRATH PRIYADHATHAN, S/O.MADHAVI, RAM NIVAS, NEAR MAX NURSERY, WEST TALAP ROAD, TALIKAVU BLOCK, KANNUR II. 6. PRASANNA BALAGOPAL, D/O.O.K.RAGHAVAN, RESIDING AT NO. 293, LIND CROSS, OIL MOLL ROAD, SAIT PALAYS, BANGALORE. (APPELLANTS 1 TO 4 AND 6 ARE REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER 5TH APPELLANT). BY ADV. SRI.C.VATHSALAN SRI.K.RAKESH ROSHAN SMT.THUSHARA.V RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SPL. TAHSILDAR, RAILWAYS, KANNUR. 2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, (CONSTRUCTION) SOUTHERN RAILWAY, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.M.C.CHERIAN,SR.SC.,RAILWAYS FOR R2. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.NOBLE MATHEW.. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/06/2008, ALONG WITH LAA 939/07 & CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- L.A.A. Nos.827/05, 1382/05, 116/06 & 939/07 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 26th June, 2008. J U D G M E N T Kurian Joseph, J. C.M.Appln. Nos.1882/05 in LAA.1382/05 & 1078/07 in LAA 939/07 : Delay condoned. The State is aggrieved by the fixation of land value by the reference court, Sub Court, Thalassery. The acquisition is for the purpose of doubling of railway line and expansion of Kannur Town Railway Station. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the land value approximately at the rate of Rs.16,000/- per cent. The reference court granted enhancement at the rate of 75%. 2. According to the claimants in LAR 35/02(LAA 827/05), they are aggrieved since there is no proper fixation of land value. There is also a contention that the fixation of the market value for the structures is not proper. As far as the contention regarding structures is concerned, the reference court has observed that the claimants had not had any grievance before the Land Acquisition Officer. But the fact remains that the claimants have taken up the issue before the reference court. It LAA NO.827/05 & connected cases 2 is now settled law that the claimants need raise their contentions and claims only before the reference court and the court is called upon to answer the reference adverting to the claims made by the claimants before the reference court. As far as value of structures is concerned, the valuation made by the Land Acquisition Officer is based on the PWD rate and in several cases, this court has granted 30% enhancement taking into consideration the market value of the materials and such enhancement has been sustained by the apex court also. As far as the land value is concerned, we find that there is some substance in the contention taken by the claimants that the property along with the building is situated in the heart of the town and it is not as if a remotely situated property is taken for the purpose of doubling a railway line. The purpose of acquisition is not merely doubling of railway line, but expansion of Kannur Railway Station also. This crucial difference in the case of the claimants in LAR 35/02 is not taken into consideration by the reference court. As far as the fixation already made to the tune of Rs.28,000/- per cent, we find that the court is justified in granting such an enhancement in view of the finding of the fact that the acquired properties are situated in an LAA NO.827/05 & connected cases 3 important area of Kannur Town, very near to the Railway Station and Bus stand. It is seen from the report of the Advocate Commissioner that the distance of the acquired property is only 30 meters from the Municipal Bus stand and 100 meters from the Railway Station. The evidence adduced in the case indicated land value at the rate of Re.1 lakh per cent, but the reference court has rightly found that they are not similar and similarly situated, in view of the difference in the respective advantages to the property. Even according to the reference court, the property covered by Ext.A1 series is in the vicinity of the acquired land. Therefore, granting 75% enhancement cannot be said to be excessive. Therefore, we dismiss the the appeals, LAA 116/06 and 939/07. 3. As far as LAA 827/05 filed by the claimants (the appellants/claimants in LAA 827/05 have limited their claim to Rs.50,000/- per cent) and LAA 1382/05 filed by the State are concerned, the judgment and decree under appeal are set aside and the matter is remitted to the reference court for fresh consideration, in the light of the observations contained in this judgment. The parties shall appear before the reference court on LAA NO.827/05 & connected cases 4 4.8.2008 and the reference shall be answered within another three months. In view of the remand as above, the appellants/claimants in LAA 827/05 shall be entitled to refund of the court fee. The stay petitions in the appeals are dismissed. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE. tgs KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ ---------------------------------------------- L.A.A. Nos.827/05, 1382/05, 116/06 & 939/07 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 26th June, 2008.