IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
LA.App..No. 105 of 2010()
1. CHAMBALON SHANTHA,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE
... Respondent
2. MANAGING DIRECTOR,
For Petitioner :SMT.R.RANJINI
For Respondent :SRI.JOBY CYRIAC, SC, KSIDC
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM
Dated :16/08/2010
O R D E R
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE &
C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ.
------------------------------------------------
L. A. A. Nos.105, 109 & 110 of 2010 and
C. O. Nos.68, 65 & 66 of 2010
------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of August, 2010
JUDGMENT
Pius C. Kuriakose, J
These appeals and cross objections pertain
to acquisition of land in Kuthuparamba village for
the purpose of construction of road leading from
Palathinkara Junction on the Thalassery Coorg
road to the Requisitioning Authority’s Industrial
Growth Centre at Valiavelicham. The awarding
officer under his award divided the entire property
under acquisition into as many as five groups
depending upon relative distance from
Palathinkara junction. For properties in Group
No.1, the properties situated in Palathinkara
LAA.105/10 & con. cases -2-
junction itself, he awarded land value at the rate
of Rs.9863/- per cent. For properties included in
Group No.2, the property situated within a
distance of 1 kilometre from Palathinkara junction,
he awarded land value at the rate of Rs.6,499/-
per cent. For properties included in Group No.3,
the properties situated within a distance of 1 to 2
kilometres from Palathinkara junction, the fixed
land value at the rate of Rs.3,899/- per cent. For
properties included in Group No.4, i.e. the
properties situated within a distance of 2 to 3
kilometres from Palathinkara junction, he fixed
land value at the rate of Rs.2,387/- per cent. For
properties included in Group No.5, the properties
situated within a distance of 3 to 6 kilometes
from Palathinkara, the Land Acquisition Officer
LAA.105/10 & con. cases -3-
awarded land value at the rate of Rs.2,148/- per
cent.
2. In these cases in the first instance, the
Reference Court fixed the value at Rs.20,000/- per
cent on the basis of evidence which came on
record. The Requisitioning Authority appealed
against that judgment and this Court remanded
the LAR cases for reconsideration in the light of
the judgment of this Court in K.S.I.D.C v.
Vayalambron Krishnan (2008(4) KLT 726). After
remand under the impugned judgment, the court
below has re-fixed the market value at
Rs.13,400/- per cent. In the appeals preferred by
the claimants they contend that the market value
re-fixed by the court is inadequate and while in
the memoranda of cross objection lodged by the
LAA.105/10 & con. cases -4-
Requisitioning Authority, it is contended that the
market value re-fixed by the court is grossly
inadequate.
3. It was very extensive submissions which
was addressed before us by Sri.Joby Cyriac, the
learned counsel for the Requisitioning Authority
and Smt.R.Ranjini, the learned counsel for the
claimants. Sri.Joby Cyriac relying on the decision
of this Court in K.S.I.D.C v. Vayalambron Krishnan
(2008(4) KLT 726) would argue that as the
properties under acquisition in these cases were
included by the Land Acquisition Officer in Group
No.3, the claimant cannot aspire for more than
Rs.9,000/- per cent which was the value finally
fixed by this Court in that judgment. Smt.Ranjini,
however, would argue that though the acquired
LAA.105/10 & con. cases -5-
properties were included by the Land Acquisition
Officer in Group No.3, the evidence will reveal that
the properties are eligible to be included in Group
No.1 itself. It was taking into account that aspect
of the matter that the court below re-fixed the
value at the present rate. According to her, once it
is recognized that the properties are eligible to be
included in Group No.1, the properties will have to
be awarded much higher value than what is
presently awarded. She argued that the court
below has found that these properties are eligible
to be included in Group No.1. She highlighted
before us the last two sentences in paragraph
No.23 of the impugned judgment.
“The properties were acquired for
the purpose of widening of the road
leading to Industrial Growth Centre,LAA.105/10 & con. cases -6-
Mooriyad, in five reaches. The acquired
properties come within the first reach
which is nearby to Kuthuparamba town.
The total length of the road is about 8
kms.”4. We have very anxiously considered the
rival submissions addressed at the Bar. We have
made a reappraisal of the evidence. We have
scanned the impugned judgment. At the outset,
we will notice that the submission of Smt.Ranjini
that the court below has found under the
impugned judgment that these properties were
eligible to be included in the Group No.1 is not
correct. In fact, in the portion of the judgment
highlighted before us by Smt.Ranjini, the learned
Subordinate Judge was only referring to the
arguments put forth on behalf of the claimants.
5. By the judgment of this Court in K.S.I.D.C
LAA.105/10 & con. cases -7-
v. Vayalambron Krishnan (2008(4) KLT 726) this
Court decided that the correct market value to be
awarded for the properties in that case which was
included in Group No.3 and awarded land value at
the rate of Rs.3,899/- per cent was Rs.9,000/- per
cent. But the evidence in this case will clearly
show that the properties under acquisition were
situated within a distance of less than one
kilometre from Palathinkara junction. This means
that we find force in the submission of Smt.Ranjini
that the properties under acquisition were eligible
to be included in a superior category i.e. Group
No.2. For properties in Group No.2, the Land
Acquisition Officer had awarded value at the rate
of Rs.6499/- per cent. We are of the considered
view that as the properties in Group Nos.1, 3, 4
LAA.105/10 & con. cases -8-
and 5 were lying contiguously and continuously in
the same village there is co-relation between the
respective values. In fact, the Land Acquisition
Officer also has maintained the ratio between the
values of these five properties. According to us,
any enhancement in the value of properties
included in a particular group should necessarily
result in enhancement in the value of properties in
the other groups also. Under the judgment in
K.S.I.D.C v. Vayalambron Krishnan (2008(4) KLT
726) this Court has re-fixed the value of land for
which the Land Acquisition Officer has awarded
Rs.3,839/- per cent at Rs.9,000/- per cent,
thereby giving 130% increase over what was
awarded. In view of our finding that the properties
under acquisition in this case are eligible to be
LAA.105/10 & con. cases -9-
included in Group No.2 it will have to be found
further that the correct market value of the
properties under acquisition should be at least
Rs.14,947/- per cent which we round off to
Rs.15,000/- per cent. Accordingly, we re-fix the
market value of the land under acquisition at
Rs.15,000/- per cent. All these appeals are
allowed and all these Cross Objections are
dismissed. Parties are directed to suffer their
respective costs. Claimants will be entitled for all
statutory benefits admissible under Sections 23
(2), 23(1A) and under Section 28 of the Land
Acquisition Act.
6. It is clarified that we have not decided by
this judgment that properties in each group
(Group Nos.1, 4 and 5 also) are eligible for
LAA.105/10 & con. cases -10-
enhancement at 130%.
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE
JUDGEC. K. ABDUL REHIM
JUDGE
kns/-