IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL MONDAY, THE 14TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 23RD KARTHIKA 1933 LA.App..No. 1484 of 2009(A) ------------------------------------- LAR.NO.171/2007 of SUB COURT, PALA ......................................................................... APPELLANT / CLAIMANT: ------------------------------------ MOTHER SUPERIOR ON BEHALF OF SNEHAGIRI MISSIONARY SISTERS, PALAI, LALAM VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM RESPONDENT / RESPONDENT: -------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRSENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. C.R. SHYAM KUMAR THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: DSV/- PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.HARILAL,JJ ------------------------------------------------- L.A.A No.1484 of 2009 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T Pius C. Kuriakose, J The claimant is the appellant. Their land in Lalam Village situated within the limits of Pala Municipal Town was acquired pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 30.6.2004. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.16,973/- per are. Before the reference court in respect of land value the claimant produced Exts.A1 to A10 and examined AW1. Apart from that there was Exts.C1 commissioner's report submitted by an Advocate Commissioner, who conducted inspection. Exts.X1 to X4 were produced from the custody of the third parties. The learned reference court on evaluating the evidence was not impressed by any particular item of evidence adduced by the claimants. However an overall assessment of the market value was done and the same was fixed at Rs.50,000/- per are. The appellant had a claim for compensation for injurious affection of 19 cents of land which though not acquired was L.A.A No.1484 of 2009 2 affected by the acquisition. The Advocate Commissioner reported that on account of the acquisition and the emergency of highway through the acquired land the aforementioned 19 cents had become reduced to a narrow strip having a length of 110 meters and average depth of 9 meters. The Advocate Commissioner in C1 reported that the value of the above portion has become reduced on account of the land acquisition. The learned subordinate judge would award a lumpsum compensation Rs.50,000/- towards injurious affection of the unacuqired property. In this appeal various grounds are raised challenging what is described to us the gross adequacy of the land value redterdmined as well as the compensation awarded for injurious affection. 2. Sri.Liji J.Vadakedom the learned counsel for the appellant addressed in detail. He draw our attention to judgments of this Court in L.A.A No.1103/2009 and 1110/2009. It was submitted in those judgments the value of acquired land was refixed on Rs.1,23,500/- per are. It was requested that the value of land under acquisition to be refixed at the above rate. Mr.Liji J.Vadakedom argued that very method adopted by the reference court for determining the compensation for injurious L.A.A No.1484 of 2009 3 affection for the unacquired property, is irregular. The learned sub judge should have fixed the percentage of diminishing the contest and then worked out the total compensation on that basis. 3. Sri.C.R.Shyamkumar, the learned Senior Government Pleader would oppose all the submissions of Sri.Liji.J.Vadakedom. Sri.Shyamkumar submitted that though it is true that the property under acquisition was situated within the limits of Pala Municipality it is in evidence that the property in this case was situated on the boundary of Pala Municipality and Bharananganam Panchayat. The same value cannot be awarded to the property situated in various parts of the Pala Municipality. As regards arguments with regard to compensation for injurious affection, Mr.Shyam Kumar submitted that it should be enquired whether the appellant is ready and willing to surrender the above unacquired portion extending to 19 cents to the Public Works Department or to the Pala Municipality to be used by them for public purposes. 4. Having very anxiously considered the submissions addressed at the Bar, we are of the view that the issue as to the correct market value of land under acquisition is covered in L.A.A No.1484 of 2009 4 favour of the appellant by judgment of this Court in L.A.A No.1103/2009 and 1110/2009. Following those two judgments we refix the value under acquisition in this appeal at the rate of Rs.1,23,500/- per are (Rs.50,000/- per cent). 5. Coming to the question of correct compensation to be paid for injurious affection of the unacquired property we are in agreement with Mr.Liji.J.Vadakedom in his submission that the method adopted by the learned Subordinate Judge was not proper. We also feel that the willingness of the claimant/appellant to part with ownership and possession of the above portion of 19 cents in favour of the Public Works Department or the Pala Municipality on receiving the market value at the rate of Rs.1,23,500/- per are should also be enquired. We are not inclined to decide the above issue finally. We set aside the impugned award to the extent it pertains to compensation for injurious affection and remand the L.A.R to the Pala Sub Court for redetermining the correct compensation to be paid for the unacquired property of the appellant extending to 19 cents. The learned Sub Judge can as part of the enquiry find out whether the claimant is willing to part with ownership or possession of the above portion on receiving land value at the L.A.A No.1484 of 2009 5 rate fixed by us for the land under acquisition. The learned Subordinate Judge at any rate will complete the enquiry and pass revised orders at the earliest, at any rate within three months from the day the parties enter appearance before the reference court. The parties will enter appearance before the reference Court on 30th November, 2011. As we find some laches on the part of the appellants in the matter of projecting their claims for compensation for injurious affection, we are not inclined to refund full court fee paid on the appeal memo to the appellant. The registry will refund only Rs.30,000/- out of the total court fee remitted by the appellant. Sd/- PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE Sd/- K.HARILAL JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge ab L.A.A No.1484 of 2009 6