IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2009 / 17TH ASHADHA 1931 LA.App..No. 238 of 2007(D) -------------------------- LAR.70/2003 of SUB COURT,THODUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT: ----------------------- SRI.GEORGE, S/O. VARGHESE, BHAGAVATHIKUNNEL, VENGALLOOR, THODUPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY THE P.A. HOLDER MR.AUGUSTINE JOSEPH BY ADV. SRI.RAJU K.MATHEWS RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT: -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI FOR R1 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/07/2009 ALONG WITH LAA.NO.1100/07, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.Nos.238 & 1100 OF 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 8th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius.C.Kuriakose, J. L.A.A.No.1100/01 is preferred by the government. L.A.A.No.238/07 is preferred by the claimant. The case pertains to acquisition of land in Kumaramangalom village within the area of Thodupuzha Municipality pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 1/06/99 for the construction of Vengalloor-Mangattukavala road . The land acquisition officer included this property in category 3 - dry land and awarded land value at the rate of Rs. 3,043/- per cent. The reference court under the impugned judgment has refixed the value of the lands at Rs. 32,143/- per cent. The evidence before the reference court consisted of Exts.A1 to A5, Ext.R1 to R3, Ext.C1 Commissioner's report and Ext.C2(a) sketch apart from the oral evidence of AWs 1 to 4. There is no counter evidence at all on the side of the government. The reference court did not place specific reliance on any of the documents produced by the claimant. But relying on Ext.C1 Commissioner's report which was to the effect that the property was enjoying nearness to state highway and frontage of Municipal road and that LAA.No.238 & 1100 of 2007 2 the property was commercial in nature as well as the court's own judgment in L.A.R.No.48/2003 pertaining to acquisition of nearby property in the same town, what the court below did was to refix land value at Rs.32,143/- per cent. 2. We have heard the submissions of the learned senior Government Pleader Sri.Basant Balaji and those of Sri.Raju.K.Mathews, learned counsel for the claimant. We are not persuaded on the submissions of the learned senior Government Pleader that the impugned judgment warrants any interference at the instance of the government. The findings entered therein are certainly supported by evidence actually on record. In fact, the judgment relied on by the reference court was relevant and based on that judgment, the enhancement now granted is perfectly justified. None of the grounds raised in L.A.A.No.238/07 appeal to us. But we notice our common judgment in L.A.A.No.121/08 & connected cases ( State of Kerala v. Jose Simon ( 2009 (1) KLT 760). It was a case pertaining to acquisition of land in Thodupuzha Municipal town itself. . The relevant Section 4(1) notification in that case was published on 18-02-2000 i.e. some 8 years subsequent to the Section 4(1) notification in the present case. It is seen that in that case for properties in category 2 which was corresponding to properties in category 2 in the present case also i.e. only slightly superior LAA.No.238 & 1100 of 2007 3 to the acquired properties in these cases, this court refixed the value of the land at Rs. 61,792/-per cent. 3. Having regard to our findings in that judgment regarding the market value of the properties in Thodupuzha Municipal town, we feel that there is justification for enhancing the market value of the lands under acquisition in this case to Rs. 35,000/- per cent. Appeal No.238/07 accordingly will stand allowed to the extent of refixing the value of land under acquisition at Rs. 35,000/- per cent. It is needless to mention that the claimant will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Section 23(2), 23(1A) and Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act on the total enhanced compensation to which he becomes eligible by virtue of our refixation under this common judgment. L.A.A.No.238/07 is allowed to the above extent. L.A.A.No.1100/2007 is dismissed. Parties are directed to suffer their respective costs. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI JUDGE LAA.No.238 & 1100 of 2007 4 sv. sv. LAA.No.238 & 1100 of 2007 5