IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 24TH JANUARY 2008 / 4TH MAGHA 1929 LA.App..No. 709 of 1999() ------------------------- LAR.49/88 OF PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE. APPELLANT/RESPONDENT: ---------------------------- STATE OF KERALA BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI V.T.K.MOHANAN RESPONDENT/CLAIMANT: --------------------------- KUZHIMBADATH AMMINABI CHERUVANNUR, FEROKE. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.MOHAMMED NIAS THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON C.M.P.614/02 IN LAA.709/99 //DISMISSED// 24.1.2008 SD/- (KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE) SD/- (HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN- UL-RASHID,JJ. ----------------------- L.A.A..709/99 J U D G M E N T 24.1.2008 KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID,JJ. -------------------------------------------------------- L.A.A.No.709 of 1999 -------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 24th DAY OF JANUARY, 2008 J U D G M E N T HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. This is an appeal by the State of Kerala challenging the decree and judgment dt.26.8.1997 passed by the Principal Sub Court, Kozhikode in L.A.R.No.49/88. The appellant has come up in appeal being aggrieved by the quantum of additional land value granted at the instance of the respondent/claimant. 2. 34.87 cents of land comprised in R..S.No.149/4 of Cheruvannur Village was acquired for the purpose of constructing a commercial centre for Calicut Development Authority. Section 4(1) notification was published on 10.11.1981. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded the land value at the rate of Rs.2,000/= per cent. Dissatisfied with the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, claimants sought for reference and the reference court refixed the land value at Rs.8,000/= per cent. L.A.A.No.709/99 2 3. In support of the claim for enhanced compensation, the claimant examined AW1 and produced Exhibit A1. The Commissioner's report was marked as Exhibit C1. The claimants placed reliance on Exhibit A1 sale deed and Exhibit C1 commission report. The court below rightly held that the circumstances leading to the execution of the basic document are not brought out in evidence and therefore the basic document is unacceptable. 4. AW1 testified before court that the property acquired is lying very near to a junction and that the property is important because of its situation near several institutions. Section 4(1) notification was published on 10.11.1981. Exhibit A1 sale deed produced is dated 22.10.1982. The consideration shown in Exhibit A1 is Rs.6,700/= per cent. The trial court came to the conclusion that the proximity of the acquired property is near to a junction whereas Exhibit A1 land is not so and hence the claimant is entitled to more value than what is shown in Exhibit A1. In fact the locational advantage and importance has been pointed out by this court in the judgment in L.A.A.No.162/92.. L.A.A.No.709/99 3 We find no reason to interfere with the finding entered by the court below because of the locational importance of the acquired land. The acquired land is more valuable than the property covered by Exhibit A1. There is no merit in the appeal. The appeal stands dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. HARUN-UL-RASHID,JUDGE. dsn