IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 23RD OCTOBER 2009 / 1ST KARTHIKA 1931 LA.App..No. 231 of 2004(C) ------------------------------- LAR.346/1999 of PRL.SUB COURT,KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT ------------------------------ THOMAS, SON OF MATHEW, KOCHUPARAMBIL, ARPOOKARA, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.VENKETESH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LATHA T. THANKAPPAN THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/10/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.231 of 2004 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 23rd day of October, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J The claimant is in appeal and his argument is that the Reference Court was not justified in not relying on Ext.A1 valuation report prepared by AW2, a retired Engineer of the PWD. The appeal is confined to claim for enhanced value towards the building which existed on the acquired property. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation of Rs.2,43,243/- for the building. It is argued by Sri.P.C.Chacko, the learned counsel for the appellant that it was a very substantial building which existed on the acquired property having plinth area of 2377 sq. ft. with as many as 15 rooms. L. A. A. No.231 of 2004 -2- The counsel argued that the full depreciated value recommended by AW2 in Ext.A2 coming to Rs.486928/- should have been awarded. We are unable to agree. The learned Subordinate Judge has given cogent reason for not placing reliance on Ext.A2 or on the testimony of AW2. At the same time, we feel that the court below could have awarded at least 32% increase on the principle that construction of building as per P.W.D schedule of rates is not a pragmatic proposition. Following that principle we award a further amount of Rs.40,000/- to the appellant. 2. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. The appellant will be entitled for all statutory benefits on the total enhanced compensation which is awarded under this judgment. Parties are directed to suffer L. A. A. No.231 of 2004 -3- their costs. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE K. SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE kns/-