IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 19TH OCTOBER 2009 / 27TH ASWINA 1931 LA.App..No. 441 of 2008() ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 15/02/2007 IN LAR. 141 /2001 IN LAR.142/2001 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): ADDL.2ND CLAIMANTS -------------------------------- R.GIRIJA DEVI, RESIDING AT T.C.NO.40/1608(1), MUTTATHARA, VALLAKKADAVU.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA SRI.M.S.KALESH SRI.HARISH GOPINATH SRI.V.VINAY MENON SMT.KVP.JAYALEKSHMY SRI.M.AJAY (IRUMPANAM) RESPONDENT(S)/ RESPONDENTS/ADDL.CLAIMANTS 3 & 4 ----------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ERIA, S/O.P.V.GOPAKUMAR, RESIDING AT T.C.NO.40/1608(1), MUTTATHARA, VALLAKKADAVU P.O THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. ANIYAN, S/O.P.V.GOPAKUMAR, T.C.NO.40/1608(1), MUTTATHARA, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/10/2009, ALONG WITH LAA NO. 476 OF 2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.Nos.441 & 476 OF 200 ------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of October, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. On these appeals coming up for admission, the learned senior Government Pleader Smt.Latha T.Thankappan has taken notice for the Government. We have heard the submissions of Sri. R.S.Kalkura, learned counsel for the claimant and those of Smt.Latha T.Thankappan learned Government Pleader. 2. The properties under acquisition in these cases were in Pettah village and the acquisition was for the purpose of New International Passenger Terminal at Chackai. The relevant Section 4 (1) notification was published on 4/2/1999. The Land Acquisition Officer included the properties in category 5 and awarded the land value at the rate of Rs.39,900/- per Are. The properties were included in category 5 on the reason that the properties were partly wet land and partly reclaimed. The Reference Court under the impugned judgment, would refix the land value at Rs.45,000/- per Are. The main point, which was argued by Sri.R.S.Kalkura, was that the properties under acquisition were dry lands with coconut trees and hence eligible L.A.A.441/2008 & conn.cases. 2 to be included in category 4. We are unable to accept this argument since the mahazar prepared at the time of taking over of possession shows that the properties were partly wet and partly reclaimed. That being so, the Land Acquisition Officer cannot be found fault with for having included the properties in category 4. It is fairly conceded by the learned Government Pleader that by judgment in L.A.A. 767/2009, this court has approved refixation of land value at Rs.50,000/- per Are for properties included in category 5. 3. Following that judgment, we allow these appeals to the extent of refixing the value of land under acquisition at Rs.50,000/- per Are. It is needless to mention that the appellant claimant will be entitled for all statutory benefits on the total enhanced compensation to which she becomes eligible by virtue of refixation done under this judgment. The parties are directed to suffer their costs. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE dpk