IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2009 / 24TH POUSHA 1930 LA.App..No. 260 of 2004(D) & Cross Objection No.135/04 -------------------------- LAR.36/1991 of ADDL.SUB COURT,KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT: ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS: ------------------------- 1. BABY MATHEW, ULLATTIL HOUSE, MANJOOR VILLAGE. 2. OUSEPH MATHAI, KANIVELIL, PARAMBRAM KARA, KADUTHURUTHY. 3. THE MANJOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MANJOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MANJOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM. ADV. SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K) SRI.SUJESH MENON V.B. SRI.MATHEW SKARIA THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.No.260 OF 2004 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 14th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius.C.Kuriakose, J. This appeal by the government pertains to acquisition of land in kothanalloor village for the expansion of Kuruppumthara market. The relevant notification under Section 4(1) was published on 1-2-1989. The land acquisition officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs. 5483/- per Are. The reference court would refix the land value at Rs. 24700/- per Are corresponding to Rs. 10,000/- per cent. 2. The evidence before the reference court consisted of Ext.A1 sale deed dated 21-7-1982, which reflected a land value of Rs. 20,000/- per cent as well as Ext.A3 common judgment in L.A.R.No.70/91 and L.A.R.No.74/91. Ext.A3 was also in respect of acquisition pursuant to the very same notification for the very same purpose. Under Ext.A3, the land acquisition officer had awarded land value at the rate of Rs. 1383/- and Rs. 617/- per Are for two different categories which was enhanced by the court to Rs. 5,000/- per cent and Rs.4,000/- per cent respectively. The court below noticed that the LAA.No.260/04 2 acquired properties had been considered much more superior than the acquired property by the land acquisition officer. What could be expected from the court below was to give a proportionate increase based on Ext.A3 for the acquired properties in these cases. But instead of doing that, what the reference court did was to fix 50% of the value reflected in Ext.A1 document as the market value of the acquired property and refix the compensation. Having gone through the judgment of the reference court and having considered the submissions of the learned Government Pleader, we are of the view that the market value presently determined by the reference court for the acquired properties cannot be said to be on the high side. In fact having regard to the finality attained by Ext.A3 judgment, there is justification for granting more amounts to the respondents . At any rate, there is no warrant for interfering with the judgment of the reference court. The appeal will stand dismissed. No costs. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE HARUN-UL-RASHID JUDGE sv. LAA.No.260/04 2