High Court Kerala High Court

State Of Kerala vs Mohammedali on 29 May, 2007

Kerala High Court
State Of Kerala vs Mohammedali on 29 May, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

LA App No. 713 of 2004()


1. STATE OF KERALA.
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. MOHAMMEDALI, S/O.MOHAMMED KUNJU,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

                For Respondent  :SRI.A.AHZAR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :29/05/2007

 O R D E R
       KURIAN JOSEPH &  T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,  JJ.

                  ----------------------------------------------

             L.A.A. Nos.713, 741 &  1071 of 2004 and

                                  1083 OF  2005

                  ----------------------------------------------

                         Dated 29th   May,  2007.

                               J U D G M E N T

Kurian Joseph, J.

C.M.Appln.No.1482/04 in L.A.A.741/04 : Delay condoned.

Aggrieved by the land value fixed by the Land

Acquisition Officer, claimants took up the matter before the

reference court. The reference court, finding that the fixation of

market value on the basis of the basis document is not proper,

since the same is of 1991, made an attempt to properly fix the

market value based on the evidence available on record. Ext.A1

is the document relied on by the claimants. That is a property

lying 200 ft. away from the acquired land and has no direct

access to the National Highway. AW2 is the purchaser. It has

come out in evidence that the acquired property is of far more

importance than the property covered by Ext.A1 and there is no

contra evidence either. That evidence is unchallenged also. The

land value shown is Rs.37,500/- per cent. It appears there is a

mistake; the value of Rs.37,500/- is per Are. The reference court

however, found that Ext.A1 has got direct access to the public

road whereas such an advantage is not available to the acquired

LAA NO.713/04 & connected cases 2

property. It was also found that Section 4(1) notification is of

August, 1994 whereas Ext.A1 was executed one year after the

notification. On these counts, 10% each in the value of Ext.A1

was deducted and the value was fixed at Rs.30,375/- per Are,

though it is wrongly stated in some portions of the judgment that

it is per cent. The extent involved in these cases are very

meagre (L.A.R.No.17/99-2.62 Ares, L.A.R.20/99- 4.05 Ares,

L.A.R.22/99-5.90 Ares and L.A.R.25/99-4.27 Ares). The fixation

made by the reference court is based on the evidence available

on record and we are of the view that it is just and reasonable.

Thus the appeals lack merit and are accordingly dismissed.

I.A.3311/04 in L.A.A.713/04, I.A.3503/04 in L.A.A.741/04,

I.A.4509/04 in L.A.A.1071/04 and I.A.3126/05 in L.A.A.1083/05 :

Dismissed.

KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE.

T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.

tgs

LAA NO.713/04 & connected cases 3

KURIAN JOSEPH &

T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ

———————————————-

L.A.A. Nos.713, 741, 1071 of 2004 &

1083 OF 2005

———————————————-

J U D G M E N T

Dated 29th May, 2007.