IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
LA.App..No. 755 of 2003()
1. STATE OF KERALA.
... Petitioner
Vs
1. KUNJU MOIDEEN,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
For Respondent :SRI.V.P.MOHAMMED NIYAZ
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Dated :28/05/2008
O R D E R
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
L.A.A.No.755 of 2003
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated: 28th May, 2008
JUDGMENT
In this appeal filed by the Government the judgment and
decree of the Sub Court, Kottayam in LAR No.81 of 1999 is under
challenge. That was a reference under Section 18(2) of the Land
Acquisition Act in respect of acquisition for the construction of a
parallel road to M.C.Road from Kottayam to Gandhinagar I Reach.
The evidence before the reference court consisted of the oral
testimony of the claimant as A.W.1, Ext.A1 copy of judgment in LAR
No.272/99 and Exts.R1 and R2, copies of the basic document and the
group sketch. Relying on the uncontroverted oral testimony of A.W.1,
the learned Subordinate Judge found that Ext.A1 property is more
important and commercial point of view than Ext.A1 property and it
was noticed by the learned Subordinate Judge on the basis of the
mahazar prepared at the time of acquisition that the distance from
the Variseri junction to the acquired property is only 85 metres.
Relying on Ext.A1 what the learned Subordinate Judge did was to
grant enhancement of 60% over the land value fixed by the awarding
officer as was done in the case of Ext.A1. Having gone through the
judgment of the reference court, I am of the view that the approach
L.A.A.No.755/03 – 2 –
of the learned Subordinate Judge was quite reasonable. I am
informed that though an appeal was preferred against Ext.A1, this
court dismissed that appeal vide judgment in LAA No.1289/02. It is
also brought to my notice that relying on the judgment confirming
Ext.A1, this court dismissed LAA No.439/03 which pertains to LAR
No.74/99, another case in which Ext.A1 was relied by the reference
court. In view of all these reasons, I do not find any reason to
interfere with the judgment and decree under appeal. The Appeal will
stand dismissed. No costs.
srd PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE