IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
LA.App..No. 284 of 2007()
1. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. M.C.BRAHMA PRAKASH,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
For Respondent :SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN
Dated :19/08/2009
O R D E R
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE &
K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.
------------------------------------------------
L. A. A. No.284 of 2007 &
L. A. A. No.196 of 2008
------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 19th day of August, 2009
JUDGMENT
Pius C. Kuriakose, J
These are appeals preferred by the Government
and the cases pertain to acquisition of land for the
construction of Calicut bye pass. The relevant Section
4(1) notification was published on 13/07/93. The
properties were in Vengeri village. The Land
Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of
Rs.7107/- per cent in L.A.R. No.459/97 corresponding
to L.A.A.284/2007 whereas in L.A.R.460/97
corresponding to L.A.A. No.196/08, the Land
Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of
Rs.5331/- per cent. The Reference Court would
L. A. A. No.284 of 2007 &
L. A. A. No.196 of 2008 -2-
uniformly re-fix the value of garden lands under
acquisition to Rs.15,000/- per cent. For the wet lands
under acquisition, the Land Acquisition Officer awarded
land value at the rate of Rs.2964/- per cent. This was
enhanced under the impugned judgment to Rs.6,000/-
per cent. We notice that the claimant being aggrieved
by the inadequacy of the compensation awarded by
the Reference Court have preferred separate appeals
and we are deciding these appeals preferred by the
Government by this judgment.
2. Having gone through the impugned judgments
and having considered the submissions of Sri.Basant
Balaji, the learned senior Government Pleader and
those of Sri.P.V.Kunhikrishnan, the learned counsel for
the claimants, we are of the view that the
L. A. A. No.284 of 2007 &
L. A. A. No.196 of 2008 -3-
enhancement granted under the impugned judgment
by the Reference Court is not excessive. There is no
warrant at all for interference at the instance of the
Government.
3. These appeals preferred by the Government
will stand dismissed.
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE
JUDGE
K. SURENDRA MOHAN
JUDGE
kns/-