High Court Kerala High Court

State Of Kerala vs Karattil Ayishumma on 26 September, 2007

Kerala High Court
State Of Kerala vs Karattil Ayishumma on 26 September, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

LA App No. 756 of 2001(D)



1. STATE OF KERALA
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. KARATTIL AYISHUMMA
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

                For Respondent  :SRI.T.KRISHNAN UNNI

The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice HARUN-UL-RASHID

 Dated :26/09/2007

 O R D E R
               KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ.
             ------------------------------------------------------------------
                             L.A.A.No.756 of 2001-D
              ------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Dated: September 26, 2007

                                      JUDGMENT

Harun-Ul-Rashid, J.

This appeal is filed by the State against the judgment and decree

dated 31.1.2001 in LAR No.39/1999 on the file of the Sub Court, Tirur.

The extent of land acquired is 0.0251 hectare (6.20 cents) of garden land

comprised in R.S.No.326/21 in Thrikkandiyur village of Tirur Taluk for

doubling of Tirur-Tirunavaya railway line. The notification under S.4(1)

was finally published on 10.2.1997.

2. The claimants, in support of their claim for enhancement of

compensation, examined PWs.1 and 2 and Exts.A1 and A2 were marked

on their side. RW.1 was examined on the side of the respondent and

Ext.B1 marked. Exts.C1 and C2 – commissioner’s report and plan – were

also marked.

3. The court below, after considering the evidence on record,

entered the finding that the acquired land and the basis land are not similar

and similarly situated, that the market value of lands similar to the acquired

land in the locality prevailing at the time of S.4(1) notification was between

Rs.25,000/- and Rs.30,000/- per cent and that the facts proved will reveal

that the acquired land is more valuable than the basis land. In the

circumstances the court below fixed the land value for the acquired land at

the rate of Rs.15000/- per cent.

LAA 756/2001 Page numbers

4. The claimant is aggrieved by the fixation of value for the

residential building situated in the property. The land acquisition officer

fixed the value of the structure at Rs.99,678/-. According to the claimant,

the value fixed by the land acquisition officer is too meagre and does not

reflect the market value of the building. Therefore, he had taken out a

commission to assess the value of the building. The commissioner

assessed the value of the building at Rs.3,16,800/- after deducting 25%

towards depreciation. The commissioner assessed the value of the

building with the assistance of an expert, who is a retired Executive

Engineer (Civil), appointed by the trial court. The court below found that

the valuation report prepared by the Railway based on the prevailing rates

approved by the local PWD, was not produced before the court by the

respondent, nor the Engineer of the Railway who made the valuation nor

the PWD Engineer was examined in support of the valuation fixed by the

land acquisition officer. In the circumstances the court below held that the

value of the building awarded by the land acquisition officer is not

acceptable. The court below entered the finding that Rs.99,678/-

awarded by the land acquisition officer is too meagre in view of the

assessment made by the commissioner appointed by the court. So, the

trial court held that justice demands that an amount of Rs.2 lakhs has to

be awarded to the building.

5. In the appeal the learned Government Pleader, though

LAA 756/2001 Page numbers

contended that the land value fixed by the court below is on the higher

side, we are of the view that the value fixed for the land at the rate of

Rs.15000/- per cent is reasonable taking into account the oral and

documentary evidence available on record.

6. Coming to the question of valuation of the building also we find

that though the commissioner valued the building at Rs.3,16,800/-, the

court below reasonably fixed it at Rs.2 lakhs which also, according to us, is

fair and reasonable.

We find no merit in the appeal filed by the State. Accordingly this

appeal stands dismissed.

KURIAN JOSEPH
JUDGE

HARUN-UL-RASHID
JUDGE.

mt/-

LAA 756/2001    Page numbers




                         KURIAN JOSEPH &
                         HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ.


———————————————-

L.A.A. No.756 of 2001-D

JUDGMENT

———————————————-

26.9.2007