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 9TH OCTOBER 2009 / 17TH ASWINA 1931 LA.App..No. 2274 of 2008(C) -------------------------------- LAR.173/1999 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT. --------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS. --------------------------------- 1. K.RAJAN, T.C.20/1945. KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, NOW RESIDING AT T.C.39/1871/1, PUTHEN ROAD, CHALAI P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. BABY VANAJA, T.C.20/1945, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, NOW RESIDING AT T.C.39/1871/1, PUTHEN ROAD, CHALAI P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.D.GANESH KUMAR FOR R1-2 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/10/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.2274 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 9th day of October, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J The Government is in appeal. The property under acquisition was in Thirumala village and the purpose of acquisition was construction of Karamana Bridge. The relevant Section 4(1) notification was published on 05/11/98. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.1,56,214/- per Are. The Reference Court placed reliance on Ext.A1 document, a post notification document alone would re-fix the land value at Rs.2,97,000/- per cent corresponding to Rs.7,33,386/- per Are. The Supreme Court has in G.M., Oil & Natural Gas Cor. Ltd. v. R. Jivanbhai Patel L. A. A. No.2274 of 2008 -2- & Anr. (2008 SAR (Civil) 894) deprecated the practice of relying on post notification document when pre- notification documents are available. It has been held by the Supreme Court that recourse can be had to post notification documents only when it becomes indispensable. We are unable to approve the action of the learned Subordinate Judge in having relying on Ext.A1 and granted the exorbitant enhancement as granted under the impugned judgment. We set aside the judgment and decree under appeal and remand L.A.R.173/99 to the Second Additional Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram. That court is directed to grant opportunity to both sides to adduce further evidence and to pass revised judgment on the basis of the entirety of the evidence which comes on record. Revised judgment as directed above will be passed by L. A. A. No.2274 of 2008 -3- the learned Subordinate Judge at the earliest, and at any rate, within four months of receiving a copy of this judgment. This appeal is, thus allowed, by way of remand. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE K. SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE kns/-