IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2011 / 24TH POUSHA 1932 LA.App..No. 925 of 2010() ------------------------- LAR.107/2006 of SUB COURT,THODUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANTS C,D & E ------------------------------- 1. MARY ABRAHAM, THEKKEKUTTU (KOCHUPURACKAL), KOLANI KARA, THODUPUZHA VILLAGE. 2. MELVIN MATHEW, -DO- 3. MABLE MATHEW, -DO- BY ADV. SRI.RAJU K.MATHEWS RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS A & B & RESPONDENT 1 AND 2 --------------------------------------------------- 1. LAKSHMIKUTTY AMMA, RADHAMANI AMMA, THEKKUMPARAMPATH, KOLANI KARA, 685 584. 2. M.M.MATHEW, S/O.MATHAI, MAMPOOZHIKAL, AYARKUNNAM-686 564. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI-685 603. 4. THE EXE.ENGINEER K.S.T.PROJECT DIVISION, P.W.D.PONKUNNAM-686 506. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.T.T.JOSEPHINA FOR R3 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/01/2011, ALONG WITH L.A.A. NO.974/2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A..Nos. 925 & 974 OF 2010 ------------------------ Dated this the 14th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan, J. The claimants are in appeal. Their properties in Thodupuzha Village were acquired for the purpose of widening of the Thodupuzha – Ponnkunnam State Highway. The notification under Section 4(1) was published on 19/10/2004. The properties acquired from the claimant in L.A.A. No.925/2010 was dry land which was categorised by the Land Acquisition Officer as Group III(B). The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the land value at the rate of Rs.21,444/- per Are. The Reference Court after considering the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the parties, refixed the land value at Rs.63,450/- per Are. The claimants contend that they are entitled to get compensation fixing the land value at Rs.50,000/- per cent. 2. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that LAA.No.925 & 974 of 2010 2 Exts.A1 and A2 produced by the claimants for comparing the land value were rejected by the court below without assigning proper reasons. Ext.A1 is a document of the year 1999, which shows that 69 cents of property was purchased by the BSNL at the rate of Rs.31,449/- per cent. The property was stated to be situated in Karimkunnam village which is the adjacent village. Since it was situated in another village, the learned Subordinate Judge was not inclined to accept the property mentioned in Ext.A1 as lands similar in nature and similarly situated. Ext.A2 is another document which is of the year 2004. As per that document, 5.5. cents of land was purchased by one Zachariah at the rate of Rs.40,000/- per cent. Since it is a small bit of land, that may not reflect the real land value of a land similar in nature and similarly situated. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the court below thereafter proceeded to decide the land value based on the award passed by that court in respect of the properties coming under Group III (A) and Group III(C). In respect of the properties shown under Group III(A), land value was fixed at Rs.70,501/- per Are whereas for the lands coming under Group III (C), land value LAA.No.925 & 974 of 2010 3 was fixed at Rs.59,926/- per Are. The learned Subordinate Judge by taking almost the average refixed the land value in respect of the properties under acquisition in these cases at Rs.63,450/- per Are. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that even originally the acquired land was having road frontage and so the claim for refixation of the land value at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per cent is quite reasonable. The learned counsel has also cited the decision in State of Kerala v. Jose Simon (2009 (1) KLT 760), wherein value of lands almost similar in nature, was refixed at the rate of Rs.82,500/- per cent. But the property in that case was situated within the limits of Thodupuzha Municipality and as such the land value shown therein cannot be accepted in this case. But, however, considering the importance of the locality and the further fact that even in 1999, as per Ext.A1 the purchase was made at the rate of Rs.31,449/-, and considering the passage of time, we are inclined to refix the land value in respect of the properties under acquisition in these cases at Rs.42,500/- per cent. The appeals are allowed accordingly. The appellants will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Section 23 LAA.No.925 & 974 of 2010 4 (2), 23(1A) and Section 28 of the Act on the total enhanced compensation to which they become eligible by virtue of this judgment. However, during the period of 61 days delay condoned by this court by separate order in C.M.Appln. No.1403/2010 in L.A.A.925/2010, the amount will not carry interest under Section 28. The Registry will take note of the orders passed by this court in the delay petition (C.M.Appln.1403/2010) while preparing the decree. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE dpk LAA.No.925 & 974 of 2010 5 PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ C.M.Appln. No.1403 of 2010 in L.A.A.No. 925 OF 2010 ------------------------ Dated this the 4th day of August, 2010 O R D E R LAA.No.925 & 974 of 2010 6 Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Heard both sides. We are of the view that notice need not be issued to the party respondents as they were not awarded any amount under the impugned judgment. This application will stand allowed and the delay will stand condoned subject to the following conditions; i). The appellant will pay a sum of Rs.2500/- to the Government through the office of the Advocate General within ten days from today and produce receipt. ii). The appellant will pay a sum of Rs.1,500/- to the High Court Legal Services Committee within the same time limit. iii). In the event of the appeal being allowed and the appellant becoming eligible for enhanced compensation, such enhanced compensation will not carry LAA.No.925 & 974 of 2010 7 interest otherwise admissible under Section 28 of the Act during the period of 61 days condoned by this order. Annex a copy of this order to the judgment to be passed in the appeal. The Registry will send up the appeal for admission once receipts against payment of the above amounts are noticed. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM , JUDGE dpk