IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST AUGUST 2011 / 9TH BHADRA 1933 LA.App..No. 1005 of 2009 (A) --------------------------------- LAR.174/2007 of SUB COURT, PALA .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------------- EMMANUEL,S/O.THOMAS,KADANKAVIL, LALAM VILLAGE,KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K) RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ----------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,KOTTAYAM. SRI.P.C.IYPE, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR R1 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.R.SABU THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/08/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & P. BHAVADASAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.1005 of 2009 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 31st day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT Bhavadasan, J Aggrieved by the inadequate compensation granted by the Land Acquisition Reference Court, the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. The claimant's property in Lalam village was acquired as per Section 4(1) notification published on 30/06/2004 for the purpose of upgradation of Ettumanoor - Poonjar State Highway. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of ` 16,973/- per Are. The Reference Court under the impugned judgment re-fixed the same to ` 33,765/- per Are. Dissatisfied with the award of the Reference Court, the claimant has come up in appeal. 3. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the L. A. A. No.1005 of 2009 -2- appellant/claimant that in L.A.A.1110/09 which pertains to acquisition of a similar land in the same village acquired for the same purpose pursuant to the same notification, this Court had enhanced the land value to ` 1,23,500/- per Are. Counsel pointed out that following the judgment in L.A.A.1110/09, ` 1,23,500/- per Are be granted to the property acquired in this case also. 4. With regard to two Anjali Trees cut and removed from the appellant's land, it is submitted that an amount of ` 2,500/- was granted by the Awarding Officer as compensation for which no additional amount was granted by the Land Acquisition Reference Court. It is submitted that the trees which were cut and removed from the acquired land were sold in public auction for an amount of ` 42,200/-. The learned counsel contended that some enhancement ought to have been granted towards the value of trees cut and removed from the appellant's property. L. A. A. No.1005 of 2009 -3- 5. We are given to understand that the properties involved in this case is situated very near to the property covered by the same notification for which enhanced land value was granted by this Court at ` 1,23,500/- per Are. We find no reason to adopt a different method for granting compensation in this case. Therefore, we grant land value at the rate of ` 1,23,500/- per Are to the appellant in this case. 6. As regards two Anjali trees cut and removed from the appellant's property, since the petitioner has produced document to show that the trees which were cut and removed from the acquired land were sold in public auction for an amount of ` 42,200/-, we feel that some enhancement necessarily has to be granted in this regard. We grant enhanced amount of ` 25,000/- on this count. 7. The appeal is allowed to the extent of re-fixing the land value of the property under acquisition at ` 1,23,500/- per Are. The value of trees cut and removed from the L. A. A. No.1005 of 2009 -4- appellant's property stands enhanced by ` 25,000/-. The appellant will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Sections 23(2), 23(1A) and under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act. Parties are directed to suffer their respective costs. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE P. BHAVADASAN JUDGE kns/-