IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 20TH MAGHA 1932 LA.App..No. 609 of 2010() ------------------------- LAR.189/2008 of III ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT ----------------------- FRANCIS SON OF RAPHEL, MALIAKKAL HOUSE, ERATTUKULANGARA ROAD, PACHALAM, COCHIN-682012. BY ADV. SRI.L.ALOYSIUS THOMAS SRI.NELSON J.MANAYIL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERAA REP. BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), ICTT VALLARPADAM, ELOOR, UDYOGMANDAL. 2. THE CHAIRMAN, COCHIN PORT TRUST, W.ISLAND. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.LATHA T.THANKAPPAN R2 BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- L.A.A.No.609 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of February, 2011 Judgment Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The claimant is in appeal. He is aggrieved by what he describes as the inadequacy of the compensation refixed by the reference court. The properties were in Kadamakkudy village. They were wet lands included in category 8B. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.8658/- per are. The court below refixed the same at Rs.18,730/- per are. In this appeal various grounds are raised challenging the award of the reference court. 2. We have heard the submissions of Mr.L.Aloysius Thomas, learned counsel for the appellant-claimant and also those of Smt.Latha T.Thankappan, Senior Govt. Pleader. 3. One of the submissions which were seriously addressed before us by Mr.Aloysius Thomas was that the court below has committed a mistake while refixing the compensation. The court below relied on Ext.A2 sale deed. Even on the basis of Ext.A2 and the reasoning adopted by the court below, the rate should LAA 609/2010 2 have been Rs.15,165/- per cent. The present fixation is the result of a clear mistake committed by the court below. 4. Another submission which was addressed before us by Mr.Aloysius Thomas was that the very same court has in subsequent cases relied on Ext.A3 and fixed higher rates for identical lands. In the nature of these submissions, we feel that it is better to remit the L.A.R.No.189 of 2008 back to the reference court. Accordingly, we set aside the judgment and decree in LAR No.189 of 2008 to the III Additional Sub Court, Ernakulam. If the parties are desirous of adducing any further evidence, the court below should permit them to do so. The court below will pass revised judgment on the basis of the evidence already on record and the further evidence, if any, which comes on record. As we find that there was some laches on the part of the appellant in the matter of adducing all the evidence at his command, we are not inclined to order refund of the entire court fee remitted. The Registry will refund only 90% of the court fee remitted. There will be a further condition that after trial, if the appellant is eligible for higher amounts than what is awarded under the impugned judgment, such higher amounts will not carry interest otherwise LAA 609/2010 3 admissible under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act during the period from 12.7.2008 till date (9.2.2011). The parties will appear before the court below on 28.2.2011. The appeal is allowed by way of remand. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. srd LAA 609/2010 4