IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 3RD AUGUST 2010 / 12TH SRAVANA 1932 LA.App..No. 1476 of 2009(D) --------------------------- LAR.176/2007 of III ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANTS: CLAIMANTS: ------------------------ 1. CHACKO VARGHESE, S/O.KADAVIL KOCHU CHACKO, PARUMALA MURIYIL, KADAPPARA VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK. 2. SHERLY, W/O.CHACKO VARGHESE, KADAVIL, PARUMALA MURIYIL, KADAPPARA VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK. (BOTH REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER PAUL RAJ JOSEPH, S/O.PUTHENPURAKKAL VARGHESE JOSEPH, 26/2870 A, PUTHENPURAKKAL, MANAYATH LANE, THEVARA, KOCHI-13). BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KURIAN SRI.MATHEW B. KURIAN SRI.K.T.THOMAS RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), KOCHI REFINERIES LTD., VYTTILA, N.F.GATE, TRIPUNITHURA. 2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, INFOR PARK, KUSUMAGIRI, KAKKANAD. ADV. SRI.P.A.AHAMED, SC, INFOPARKS FOR R2 SRI.THOUFEEK AHAMED FOR R2 SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT. LATHA T. THANKAPPAN. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKSE & C.K. ABDUL RAHIM, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = L.A.A. 1476 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = DATED TIS, THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2010. J U D G M E N T Abdul Rahim, J. Claimants are in appeal. 2. An extent of 2.10 Ares of land situated in Kakkanadu Village was acquired for expansion of the Info Park. The last date of publication of notification under Section (4)(1) was 18.7.2005. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded value of Rs.1,59,600/- per Are corresponding to Rs. 64,590/- per Cent, relying on Ext.R5 document which is a sale deed executed in the year 2004, deducting 25% from the value shown in that document. Before the reference court, the claimants have produced Exts.A2 to A5 documents in support of their claim for enhancement. Ext.A5 is a post notification document and hence we are not inclined to consider the same. Exts.A2 and A3 are documents executed in the year 2000, which showed value of Rs. 2,26,820/- per Are corresponding to Rs. 92,000/- per Cent. It has come out in evidence that properties covered under Exts.A2 and A3 are situated near to the acquired property. The reference court, relying on Exts.A2 and A3, had re-fixed the land value at Rs. 3,40,092/- per Are corresponding to Rs. 1,37,633/- per Cent, giving an increase of 10% LAA 1476/2009 2 per year for a period of 5five years from the value shown in Exts.A2 and A3. 2. Heard Sri. K.T. Thomas, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri. P.A. Ahammed, learned counsel for the requisitioning authority and also Smt. Latha T. Thankappan, learned Senior Government Pleader. It is submitted by the appellant that the acquired land is situated on the side of the Seaport - Airport Road, which is a most important thoroughfare in Kakkanad and that the property is situated just opposite to the 'Special Economic Zone' at Kakkanad. All the relevant aspects were highlighted to convince prominence of the location wherein the acquired land is situated. According to the appellant, Exts.A2 and A3 are properties having only lesser importance than the acquired properties and the method of giving 10% enhancement on the value adopted by the reference court is highly inadequate. 3. It is noticed that Ext.A4 was not accepted by the reference court observing that the property is situated at 31/2 Kms. away from the acquired property, nearer to the District Collectorate. Learned counsel made available a copy of Ext.A4 document for our perusal. He also pointed out the report of the Advocate Commissioner wherein the lie and nature of the property covered under Ext. A4 is narrated. We notice that even though the LAA 1476/2009 3 property covered under Ext.A4 is situated at a distance of 31/2 Kms.; the said property is only a residential compound without having any direct frontage of the Seaport - Airport Road. It is also argued that the acquired property is not situated far away from the District Collectorate and other public institutions of commercial importance. 4. We have considered the entire facts and circumstances attendant in this case. We are of the opinion that Ext.A4 document could not be discarded totally while fixing land value of the acquired property. On a perusal of Ext.A4, we are convinced that the property covered therein is only a residential plot which was sold by the Greater Cochin Development Authority, a Government owned corporation. It is evident that the land is only a residential plot having no commercial importance. We are also of the opinion that 10% increase per year granted by the reference court is slightly inadequate. Considering totality of the circumstances, applying the rule of thumb we fix the land value of the acquired property at Rs. 1,90,000/- per cent, corresponding to Rs. 4,69,490/- per Are. 5. We clarify that the enhancement granted in this case is on taking note of the fact that the property covered under this case is included in Category No.1 which is having frontage of Seaport - Airport Road. The enhancement granted in this case shall not be taken as a criteria with respect LAA 1476/2009 4 to properties included in other categories. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed,re-fixing the land value at the rate of Rs. 1,90,000/- per Cent corresponding to Rs. 4,69,490/- per Are. The appellant/claimant will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under the Act on the enhanced compensation. Needless to say that while drafting the decree, the land acquisition court will take note of the conditions imposed while condoning the delay as per order in CM Application No. 1823/2009 through order dated 5.11.2009. PIUS C. KURIAKSE, (JUDGE) C.K. ABDUL RAHIM, (JUDGE) knc/-