IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
LA.App..No. 29 of 2005()
1. CHEMMAYI MARIYAM, W/O. MUHAMMED,
... Petitioner
2. CHEMMAYI SABITHA, D/O. MUHAMMED,
3. CHEMMAYI SAJITHA, D/O. MUHAMMED,
Vs
1. TSHE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR FOR
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.T.A.RAMADASAN
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN
Dated :05/10/2009
O R D E R
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
L.A.A No. 29 OF 2005
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 5th day of October, 2009
JUDGMENT
Pius C. Kuriakose, J
The application for amendment has been allowed. Acquired
property of the appellants is valued by the method of
capitalization of income from fruit bearing trees standing on the
property. Before the reference court, a last minute attempt was
made by the appellants to have their compensation redetermined
by adopting the method of land value. Learned Sub Judge
noticed the land value re-fixed by him in other connected cases
and observed that if land value method is adopted and the
compensation is redetermined the same will only be lesser than
the compensation awarded to the appellant by the Land
Acquisition Officer adopting the method of capitalization of
income from fruit bearing trees.
2. The point which is urged by Sri. George, learned
counsel for the appellants is that the reference court has re-fixed
the land value in several other connected cases at Rs.30,000/-
and even Rs.4500/- per cent respectively. According to him if
the market value of the land is fixed as Rs.30,000/- per cent or
at any amount higher than Rs.2,500/- per cent, the appellants
L.A.A No. 29 OF 2005.
: 2 :
will become entitled for much higher compensation than the
compensation awarded to him by the Land Acquisition Officer
which has been confirmed by the learned Sub Judge under the
impugned judgment.
3. Smt.Latha T Thankappan, Sr. Government Pleader
submitted that this court has approved the re-fixation of land
value at Rs.2,500/- per cent. She submitted that against the
fixation of market value at rates higher than Rs. 2,500/-, appeals
are pending before this court. In reply, to the above
submission, learned counsel for the appellants submits that, even
if the compensation is determined by taking the market value of
the land as Rs.2,500/-, what is awarded by the Land Acquisition
Officer will be found to be less.
4. Having considered the rival submissions, we feel that
an opportunity can be given to the appellant to have a
compensation awarded to which he is eligible by adopting the
land value method. However, since it is only before this court,
that the appellant took decision to go on for the land value
method, we are inclined to offer him such opportunity only on
conditions.
5. The result is that the impugned judgment and decree
are set aside. LAR No.270/2000 is remanded to the reference
L.A.A No. 29 OF 2005.
: 3 :
court and the reference court is directed to permit the appellant
to produce evidence showing the correct market value of the
land under acquisition including other judgments of that court
and this court. That court is directed to re-fix the total
compensation to which the appellant is eligible on the basis of
the evidence is concerned. Dispute regarding the correct extent
acquired from the possession of the appellants will also be settled
by the court by giving opportunity for adduction of evidence by
the parties. The parties will enter appearance before the
reference court on 31.12.2009.
However, it is made clear that the enhanced compensation
to which the appellant may become eligible by virtue of the
revised judgment to be passed by the reference court, appellants
will not be entitled to interest otherwise admissible under section
28 of the Land Acquisition Act during the period from 31.5.2004
till 25.11.2008. Since the appellant is responsible for this order
of remand, the 1/3rd court fee remitted will not be refunded.
( PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE)
(K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE)
jma