IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 LA.App..No. 357 of 2009(D) -------------------------- LAR.89/2005 of PRL. SUB JUDGE,THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADERSRI. BENNY VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT AND R2 ------------------------------ 1. K.M. AMMALU AMMA, W/O. LATE GOPALAN NAMBIAR, CHANDRALAYAM, P.O. MATTANNUR. 2. K.M. MURALEENATH, CHANDRALAYAM, P.O. MATTANNUR 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, WSP DIVISION, KWA, KANNUR. ADV. SMT.AMBIKA DEVI, SC, KWA FOR R3 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... LA.A.No.357 OF 2009 ............................................. Dated this the 25th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Land Acquisition Court, Thalassery in LAR.No.89/2005. The property having an extent of 0.0013 hectares of land with a building was acquired for the purpose of water supply scheme and an award was passed for a sum of Rs.1,78,647/= which included the land value as well as the structural value. On reference, the land acquisition court did not interfere with the structural value but fixed the land value at Rs.15,000/= per cent and ordered accordingly. It is against that decision, the State has come up in appeal. 2. The area acquired is having an extent of three fourth of a cent. The property acquired is a garden land which touches Mattannur-Anjarakandi National Highway. The relied on document by the party relates to purchase of a land by the LIC of India but it is situated in the main road. There was also a contention that the property will fetch a value of Rs.75,000/= basing on Ext.X1. Ext.X1 : 2 : LA.A.No.357 OF 2009 Commissioner’s report was not accepted by the Land Acquisition Court because it lacked particulars. So taking into consideration the fact that the land acquired is situated very near to the town and is a garden land adjacent to Anjarakandi road, the Land Acquisition Court felt it proper to fix the land value at Rs.15,000/= per cent. It had not accepted the document whereby the land value was shown as Rs.32,000/= on the ground that it is in a better place and also it does not accept the Commissioner's report. Considering the nearness of the town and the factum that the land being situated adjacent to a road, reasonable amount of Rs.15,000/= has been fixed as the land value per cent. The area acquired is also very negligible in extent. So taking into consideration all these aspects, I find that the award does not call for any interference. So, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 3 : LA.A.No.357 OF 2009 cl