IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 20TH JUNE 2011 / 30TH JYAISHTA 1933 LA.App..No. 132 of 2011() ------------------------- LAR.125/2007 of I ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS IN LAR -------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, N.H.DIVISION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.P.N.SUMANGALA RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT IN LAR ------------------------------ MOHAMMED IBRAHIM, K.P.HOUSE, CHULLIMANOOR, NEDUMANGADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.V.S.AFSAL KHAN SRI.I.ANWAR HUSSAIN THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.No. 132 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 20th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. This appeal by the Government pertains to acquisition of land in Thycaud village for the purpose of widening of road from Killipalam - Karamana Reach III. The acquisition was pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 23/7/1998. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value of the land under acquisition at Rs.1,64,673/- per Are. The Reference Court on evaluating the evidence refixed the market value at Rs.9,88,000/- per Are. 2. In this appeal, the Government has raised various grounds. Smt.P.N.Sumangala learned Government Pleader drew our attention to the judgment of this court in L.A.A. No.328/2009. According to her, the above judgment pertains to acquisition of identical lands for the same purpose pursuant to the same notification. She submitted that under that judgment the market value has been refixed from Rs.9.88,000/- to Rs.6,10,000/- per Are. She requested that the above judgment LAA.No.132/2011 2 be followed in this case also. 3. The learned counsel for the claimant opposed the submissions of the learned Government Pleader. According to him, there is no similarity between the land involved in L.A.A. No.328/2009 and the present case. 4. The opposition of the learned counsel for the claimant notwithstanding, we feel that in order to maintain consistency, we have to follow the decision taken by this court in L.A.A.No.328/2009. Hence, we allow this appeal and refix the market value of the property under acquisition at Rs.6,10,000/- per Are. The claimant will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Section 23 (2), 23(1A) and Section 28 of the Act on the total refixed compensation. Parties are directed to suffer their respective costs. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE dpk