IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2009 / 29TH ASHADHA 1931 LA.App..No.1117 of 2007(D) -------------------------------- LAR.19/2001 of ADDL.SUB COURT, NORTH PARAVUR .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT IN THE LAR ---------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA). BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LATHA T. THANKAPPAN RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS ---------------------------------- 1. VEERAN, S/O MUSTHAFA MUSLIAR, KOPPARAMBIL, IRAPURAM, KUNNATHUNDU TALUK. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KINFRA, T.C.14/1026, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, RUBBER PARK OF INDIA PVT.LTD., 5TH FLOOR, PENTA TOWERS, KOCHIN-17. ADV. SRI.M.PATHROSE MATTHAI, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R2 & 3 SRI.SAJI VARGHESE FOR R2 & 3 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & P. Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.1117 of 2007 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 20th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J The notice which was sent to R1 is returned with the endorsement “unclaimed”. We declare that R1 has been duly served and take up the appeal for hearing and disposal. 2. This appeal is preferred by the Government and the acquisition has been made at the instance of the second respondent/KINFRA for the benefit of Rubber Park of India Pvt. Ltd. The claimant despite service, has not entered appearance before this Court. We have heard the submission of Smt.Latha T. Thankappan, the learned Senior Government Pleader and those of Sri.M.Pathrose Mathai, senior counsel for L. A. A. No.1117 of 2007 -2- the third respondent. We have heard Sri.G.S.Reghunatha, the learned counsel for KINFRA also. 3. Under the impugned judgment, the value of Rs.2252/- per Are awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer for reclaimed lands has been enhanced to Rs.3980/- per Are while the value of original dry lands for which the Land Acquisition Officer awarded Rs.5863/- per Are has been enhanced to Rs.9879/- per Are. 4. Having regard to the submissions addressed at the Bar and having gone through the impugned judgment, we are of the view that the enhancement granted is slightly excessive. We are informed that in other cases of acquisition pursuant to the same notification for the same purpose this Court has L. A. A. No.1117 of 2007 -3- approved enhancement of value in the case of dry lands up to 45% and in case of wet lands up to 50%. 5. Having regard to the circumstances attending on this case, we feel that a uniform rate of enhancement by 50% over what was awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer is justified. Accordingly, we re- fix the value of the reclaimed land under acquisition at Rs.3378/- per Are. Similarly, we re-fix the value of dry lands under acquisition at Rs.8794.5 per Are. 6. Appeal stands allowed to the above extent, but in the circumstances, without any order as to costs. It is needless to mention that the claimants/respondents will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Sections 23(2), 23(1A) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act on the total enhanced compensation to which they become eligible by virtue L. A. A. No.1117 of 2007 -4- of the re-fixation of land value done under this judgment. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE P. Q. BARKATH ALI JUDGE kns/-