IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE THURSDAY, THE 27TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 6TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 LA.App..No. 2250 of 2008() -------------------------- LAR.80/2004 of SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD (ROAD SECTION), CANTONMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS ------------------------ 1. G.SYAMALA, D/O.GOMATHY, THOPPIL VILAKATHU VEEDU, NEERAZHI LANE, ULLOOR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SREEJA.S., THOPPIL VILAKATHU VEEDU, NEERAZHI LANE, ULLOOR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SANTHOSH KUMAR.V., THOPPIL VILAKATHU VEEDU, NEERAZHI LANE, ULLOOR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SAJIKUMAR.V., THOPPIL VILAKATHU VEEDU, NEERAZHI LANE, ULLOOR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.No. 2250 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 27th day of November , 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal filed by the government pertains to acquisition of 0.16 Ares of land in Cheruvakkal village within the limits of Thiruvananthapuram Corporation for the construction of a four line road from Ulloor junction to Kuzhivila bye-pass pursuant to a notification under Section 4(1) dated 15-05-2003. The land acquisition officer fixed land value at the rate of Rs. 98681/- per Are. The reference court would enhance the same to Rs. 2,00,000/- per Are as against the claim of the respondents for refixation of land value at the rate of Rs. 2,00,000/- per cent. 2. The evidence before the reference court consisted of the oral testimony of AW1- the claimant and Ext.A1 sale deed No. 5369/96. On the side of the appellant-respondent, the evidence consisted of only Ext.R1 copy of Mahazer , Ext.R2 DVS, Ext.R3 field measurement sketch and Ext.R4 notes to award. There was no counter oral evidence on the side of the appellants. The basis document was not produced by the appellant. The court below however relied on the LAA.No. 2250/08 2 discussions of the basis document in Ext.R4 and found that the awarding officer was not justified in relying on the basis document. The above view of the learned Subordinate Judge in my opinion is correct. The surviving evidence was the oral evidence of AW1 and Ext.A1. The learned Subordinate Judge found on the basis of AW1's testimony and Ext.R1 that the property covered by Ext.A1 was comparable to the acquired property. Ext.A1 revealed a land value of Rs. 1,00,000/- per cent corresponding to Rs. 2,47,000/- per Are. Despite the finding that Ext.A1 property was comparable almost in all respects with the acquired property, the learned Judge became inclined to award land value at the rate of Rs. 2,00,000/- per Are only. Importantly, the learned Judge omitted to notice that Ext.A1 was executed in 1996 and that the acquisition is taking place in 2003. I feel, having gone through the judgment that there is absolutely no warrant for interfering with the present fixation of land value by the reference court. I do not find any reason to admit this appeal. The appeal will stand dismissed inlimine. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv. LAA.No. 2250/08 3