IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
LA.App..No. 1762 of 2007()
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY
... Petitioner
Vs
1. PUTHIYA PURAYIL SAROJINI, W/O. LATE
... Respondent
2. PUTHIYA PURAYIL RAGINI,
3. PUTHIYA PURAYIL RAJESH,
4. RAJEEVAN,
5. RAJANI,
6. RATHEESH,
7. THE PROJECT OFFICER,
For Petitioner :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
For Respondent :SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :04/11/2009
O R D E R
M.N. KRISHNAN, J
-------------------------------------
L.A. APP. NO. 1762 OF 2007
-------------------------------------
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2009
JUDGMENT
This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Land
Acquisition Court, Payyannur in L.A.R 62/01. The subject matter
of reference is with respect to land value for 0.0107 hectares of
land in Survey No.170/21 of Sreekandapuram Village. The Land
Acquisition Officer awarded an amount of Rs.2,980/- per cent and
it was against that order, the reference was made. The order has
been considered by the Land Acquisition Court in pages 7, 8 and
9 of the award. The property acquired is about 500 meters away
from the Sreekandapuram town. The claimant relied on A1 and
A2 documents. In Ext.A1, the centage value is shown as 15775.
Ext.A2 refers to a common judgment in L.A.R.7/2002 and
169/2001.
2. The said land is situated 2 kilometers away from the
Sreekandapuram town. In that case, the Land Acquisition Court
fixed the land value at Rs.8.169/- per cent and it has not been
challenged. Here the property acquired is only 500 meters away
L.A.A.NO.1762/2007
2
from the town and therefore the claimant has claimed an
enhanced rate. The Land Acquisition Court after taking into
consideration those aspects had fixed the land value at
Rs.9,000/- per cent which by no stretch of imagination can, be
held to be on the higher side. So far as the value of structures is
concerned, the Court considered the matter and for each pillar
granted Rs.500/-, making it a total Rs.18,000/-, that is an
enhancement of Rs.4,000/-.
3.The Land Acquisition Court has considered the matter only
in the correct perspective and arrived at a decision on the basis
of valid documents and therefore the award does not call for any
interference.
Therefore the appeal is dismissed.
M.N. KRISHNAN,
JUDGE
SS