IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE FRIDAY, THE 22ND AUGUST 2008 / 31ST SRAVANA 1930 LA.App..No. 678 of 2007(D) -------------------------- LAR.58/2001 of PRL.SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT: RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), KOZHIKODE. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BASANT BALAJI RESPONDENTS: CLAIMANT: -------------------------------------------- 1. K.T. RUKKIYA, D/O.ABDURAHAMANKUTTY, KAPPAD HOUSE, KARANTHUR, KOZHIKODE. 2. INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN – R1 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J. ============== L.A.A.No. 678 OF 2007 ==================== Dated this the 22nd day of August, 2008. J U D G M E N T Heard Sri. Basant Balaji, learned Government Pleader and Sri. Ramesan Nambissan, counsel for the respondent/claimant. This appeal pertains to acquisition of 0.0741 cents of garden land in Kunnamangalam Village for the purpose of Indian Institute of Management, Kozhikode. The relevant notification under Section 4(1) was on 14.1.1999. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.13,626/- per cent. 2. The evidence before the reference court consisted of oral testimony of AWs 1 to 3 and documents A1 to A3 on the side of the claimant and Exts.X1 and X2 commissioners report and X3 plan submitted by the petitioner. There was absolutely no counter evidence on the side of the Government. The learned Sub Judge, on appreciating the evidence found and in my opinion rightly that, claimants are entitled for enhancement. It was noticed that the basic documents has been not produced at all. The advocate commissioners as well as the valuers had recommended for enhancement of land rates to Rs.2 Lakhs and L.A.A.No. 678 OF 2007 2 even more. The learned Sub Judge did not become inclined to accept the recommendation. However, essentially on the oral evidence given by AW1, the party and the advocate commissioner regarding the importance of the locality, nearness of commercial and industrial establishments to the property, the land value was re-fixed at Rs. 22,000/- per cent. Mr. Ramesan Nambissan would submit drawing my attention to appeals by the claimants against the judgment, that the very same learned Sub Judge has, in respect of the properties lying interior, has re-fixed the land value as Rs.50,000/- per cent in other cases covered by the very same notification. This aspect can be considered in the appeals filed by the claimants. Having gone through the judgment and having heard the submission, I do not find any reason to say that the learned Sub Judge erred in the matter o fgranting the enhancement presently granted. Accordingly, the appeal will stand dismissed. No costs. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE bkn/-