IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2011 / 25TH JYAISHTA 1933 LA.App..No. 162 of 2011(A) ------------------------------- LAR.57/2008 of III ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT IN LAR ----------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL TASHILDAR(LA),ICTT,VALLARPPADAM, ELOOR. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.P.N.SUMANGALA RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS AND ADDL.RESPONDENT NO.2 IN LAR ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THRESIA,CHAKKALAKKAL,SOUTH CHITTOOR. 2. SELIN,MUZHANGATHARA,KORAMBADAM, ERNAKULAM. 3. GLADIS,KATHULLI,POLICE QUARTERS, KOMBARA. 4. NOBERT,S/O.ANDAPPAN,RESIDING AT MUZHANGATHARA HOUSE,KOTHAD,KADAMAKUDY VILLAGE, C/O.RAPHEL,THOTTATHUSSERY HOUSE,KOTHAD.P.O. 5. VINCY,KALATHIPARAMBU,UDAYAMPEROOR. 6. SILVI,MANAYIL,VADUTHALA. 7. JULIE,SNEHANILAYAM,KAKKANAD. 8. MARY MICHALE,MUZHANGATHARA,KORAMBADAM, ERNAKULAM. 9. PAUL ANTONY,MUZHANGATHARA,KORAMBADAM, ERNAKULAM. LA.App..No. 162 of 2011(A) -2- 10. JOSEPH SHIJU,MUZHANGATHARA,KORAMBADAM, ERNAKULAM. 11. PETER,MUZHANGATHARA,KORAMBADAM, ERNAKULAM. 12. REENA THOMAS,MUZHANGATHARA,KORAMBADAM, ERNAKULAM. 13. MARIYA SHALIMA(MINOR),REPRESENTED BY HER NATURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER REENA THOMAS. CLAIMANTS 1 TO 3 AND 5 TO 13 ARE REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER NOBERT(4TH CLAIMANT). 14. THE CHAIRMAN,COCHIN PORT TRUST, W.ISLAND-682003. ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR FOR R14 SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR FOR R14 SRI.K.K.APPU FOR R1 TO 13 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/06/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & N. K. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.162 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J The Government is in appeal. The case pertains to acquisition of land in Kadamkudy village for the purpose of construction of 4 line connectivity road from Vallarpadom to Kalamassery. The relevant Section 4(1) notification was published on 27/09/2005. The Land Acquisition Officer included the property in category-4A, properties having access from the Panchayath metalled road and awarded land value at the rate of ` 75,843/- per Are. Before the Reference Court, the claimants had a claim that the property was eligible to be included in a superior category. This claim was repelled by the Reference Court. Before the Reference Court, the claimants relied on Exts.A1 to A5 and Ext.C1 Commission Report and Ext.C1(a) sketch submitted by the Commissioner apart from his oral evidence as AW1. L. A. A. No.162 of 2011 -2- Ultimately the learned Subordinate Judge relied on Ext.A5 minutes of the Ernakulam District Collector under which the value of ` 2,15,393/- per Are was fixed as the value to be given for land owners who had opted for the DLPC package. The court awarded the same rate re-fixing the value of the land under acquisition at the same rate. 2. Various grounds have been raised in this appeal assailing the decision of the court below. We have heard the submissions of Smt.P.N.Sumangala, the learned Government Pleader for the appellant who was supported by Smt.Thushara James for the Requisitioning Authority. We have also heard the submission of Sri.K.K.Appu, the learned counsel for the claimants/respondents. Smt.Sumangala and Smt.Thushara submitted that the court below was not at all justified in awarding full value reflected in Ext.A5 minutes as the said value takes into account the solatium component also at 30%. Sri.Appu would support that there is every justification for upgrading the category of property under acquisition to category-3. We are unable to entertain the L. A. A. No.162 of 2011 -3- submission of Sri.Appu for upgradation of the category in the present appeal which is filed by the Government. We find force in the submission of the Government Pleader and Smt.Thushara that the full value reflected in Ext.A5 should not have been awarded. We deduct 30% from the above value. Thus, allowing this appeal we re-fix the value of the land under acquisition at ` 1,50,775/- per Are. The claimants/respondents will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Sections 23(2), 23(1A) and under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act on the above re-fixed compensation. The parties are directed to suffer their respective costs. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE N. K. BALAKRISHNAN JUDGE kns/- L. A. A. No.162 of 2011 -4-