IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL TUESDAY, THE 6TH DECEMBER 2011 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 LA.App..No. 1879 of 2008(D) --------------------------- LAR.19/1999 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,ATTINGAL .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANTS ----------------------- 1. M.ABDUL LATHEEF, SHAMIN MANZIL, KALLOOR THONNACKAL, MANJAMALA. 2. M.ABDUL RAHIM, SAJITHA MANZIL, PALLIPPURAM. 3. M.ABDUL RASHEED, JAFFAR MANZIL, PALLIPPURAM, KANIYAPURAM. 4. K.MUHAMMAD IQBAL, KUZHIKKARA VEEDU, PALLIPPURAM, KANIYAPURAM. 5. HABSA BEEVI, KUZHIKKARA VEEDU, PALLIPPURAM, KANIYAPURAM. 6. MUNEERA, SHAMEEN MANZIL, MANJAMALA. 7. ASSINA BEEVI, D/O.JAMEELA BEEVI @ INMAILATHU BEEVI, THEKKEVILA, ALUMMOODU, KANIYAPURAM, PALLIPPURAM VILLAGE. 8. NAZEER, S/O. IBRAHIM JUNJU, THEKKEVILA, ALUMMOODU, KANIYAPURAM, PALLIPPURAM VILLAGE. 9. NAZAR,S/O. IBRAHIM KUNJU, S/O. IBRAHIM KUNJU, THEKKEVILA, ALUMMOODU, KANIYAPURAM, PALLIPPURAM VILLAGE. 10. SAKEER HUSSAIN, S/O.IBRAHIM KUNJU, THEKKEVILA ALUMMOODU, KANIYAPURAM, PALLIPPURAM VILLAGE. 11. JUNAITHA, D/O. JAMEELA BEEVI, THEKKEVILA, ALUMMOODU, KANIYAPURAM, PALLIPPURAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.M.DINESH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY G.P. HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SECRETARY, ANDOORKONAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH. *3. MOHAMMED HANEEFA, S/O. SULTHAN PILLAI, MADAVILAKOM PURAYIDAM, THEKKEVILA, ALUMMODU, KANIYAPURAM R3 IS DELETED FROM THE ARRAY OF PARTIES AT THE RISK OF THE APPELLANT/PETITIONER VIDE ORDER DATED 28.9.11 IN I.A.NO.2956/11 SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. C.R. SHYAM KUMAR THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. HARILAL,JJ. .................................................................... L.A.A.NO.1879 OF 2008 ................................................................... Dated this the 6th day of December, 2011. JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J. Claimants are the appellants. Their properties in Pallipuram village were acquired pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 11.1.1994 for the purpose of KSRTC Sub Station, Kaniyapuram. The L.A. Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.13,624/- per Are. The reference court under the impugned judgment has refixed the land value at Rs.17,036/- per Are. Various grounds have been raised challenging what is described as gross inadequacy of the market value predetermined by the reference court. 2. Sri. Dinesh-learned counsel for the appellants addressed averments based on the grounds and all the submissions of Sri.Dinesh were opposed by Senior Government Pleader – Sri.C.R. Shyam Kumar. Sri. Dinesh drew our attention to the award passed by the Attingal Sub Court in LAR.Nos.25/1999,22/1999 and 20/1999 on 30.6.2003 and submitted that for identical properties reference court has refixed the land value at Rs.37,500/- per Are. According L.A.A.NO.1879 OF 2008 : 2 : to him, at least so much of value should be awarded to the appellants also. In view of the above submission, we directed the Registry on 18.11.2011 to inform whether the above award of the Attingal Sub Court has attained finality. Registry has now reported to us that against those awards LAA.No.713, 741,1071/04 and 1083/2005 were preferred by the Government, but all the appeals were dismissed. A copy of the common judgment in those appeals were placed before us. A perusal of the common judgment would show that for properties which were the subject matter of the three LAR cases referred to by Sri.Dinesh to this Court finally fixed the market value at Rs.30,375/- per Are. Sri. Dinesh requested that by allowing this appeal the market value of the land under acquisition refixed at Rs.30,375/- Sri. Syam Kumar does not agree. Sri. Syam Kumar submitted that unlike the properties which were involved in the other appeals, the properties involved in the present case did not have frontage of the road. Sri.Dinesh does not agree. He submitted by referring to a group sketch that the property under acquisition in this case was also enjoying the road L.A.A.NO.1879 OF 2008 : 3 : frontage. We enquired of Sri.Dinesh whether the appellants will be able to prove that their properties were enjoying road frontage, if an opportunity is given. Sri. Dinesh answered in the positive. In the above circumstances, we are of the view that appellants can be afforded an opportunity to prove that their properties under acquisition are also enjoying the road frontage and hence eligible to be awarded the same rate as seen awarded to the claimants in LAR Nos.25/99, 22/99 and 20/99 on the file of the Attingal Sub Judge. Under the above submissions, the appeal is disposed of as follows: 3. The judgment and decree under appeal are set aside. LAR.No.19/1999 is remanded to the Sub Court, Attingal. The learned Subordinate Judge is directed to pass a revised order after affording an opportunity to the appellants to adduce whatever further evidence they want to. While passing revised judgment, the learned Subordinate Judge will due regard to all the relevant materials especially the judgment of this Court in LAA.Nos.713,741,1071/2004 and 1083/2005. Registry will refund only 90% of the court fee remitted on the L.A.A.NO.1879 OF 2008 : 4 : appeal memorandum to the counsel for the appellants. Parties will enter appearance before the reference court on 22.12.2011. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. K. HARILAL, JUDGE. cl