IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2009 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1930 LA.App..No. 309 of 2009() ------------------------- LAR.9/2001 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE DISTRIC COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.K.BABU RESPONDENT(S): CLIMANTS ----------------------- CHITHRA, D/O.INDIRA DEVI, "SAMPTHRIPTHI", KOTTAKAKOM, KIZHAKKEKOTTA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.No.309 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 18th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. We do not find any reason for interfering with the judgment of the reference court impugned in this case. The acquisition was for the purpose of construction of houses for economically backward sections viz. Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in People Planning Campaign for Thiruvananthapuram Corporation. The relevant Section 4(1) notification was published on 11/9/1998. The awarding officer fixed the land value at Rs.76881/- per Are. Before the reference court the evidence on the side of the claimant consisted of Exts.A1 to A3 copies of sale deed apart from the oral testimony of AW1. On the side of the Government no document revealing land value of the property at the relevant time was produced. No counter oral evidence was adduced by the Government to the testimony of AW1. The learned Subordinate Judge noticed that the property was situated very close to the famous Attukal Temple and that the document L.A.A..No.309/2009 2 produced by the claimant reveals much higher land value at the relevant time than the value awarded by the land acquisition officer. Of course, the learned Judge did not place reliance on any of the documents produced, instead what was done was to grant 30% enhancement making guess work. In land acquisition cases determination of market value, to a certain extent, can be on the basis of guess work. The only question to be considered in such a case is whether the guess is a good one in the sense that the guess has some nexus to the evidence actually available on record. According to us, it is more or less the correct market value of the property at the relevant time which was arrived at by the learned Judge. The appeal will hence stand dismissed in limine. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE dpk