PRABHAKARAN NAIR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these appeals are preferred by the claimants whose lands in Thodupuzha village were acquired for the purpose of construction of Kolani - Vengalloor Bye pass. The acquisition covered by L.A.A. Nos. 417/2009, 748/2009, 674/2009 and 645/2009 were pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 12/6/2002. For the lands involved in those cases, which were dry lands, the Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs. 19,512/- only per Are. The Reference Court in those cases by a common judgment would refix the land value at the rate of Rs. 57,733/- per Are. The lands involved in other two appeals (L.A.A. Nos. 298/2010 & 347/2010) were also situated in the same village and the acquisition was for the same purpose. However, those acquisitions were on the basis of a notification issued two and half years after the notification in the earlier cases. For the lands in those cases, the Land Acquisition Officer awarded value at the rate of Rs. 25366/- per Are. The Reference Court, relying on the common judgment which is impugned in the first four cases, would refix the market value of land at Rs. 75,055/- per Are.

(2.) In these appeals, the claimants have raised identical grounds contending that the market value redetermined by the Reference Court under the two common judgments is grossly inadequate. Mr. K.K. Chandran Pillai, learned Counsel for the appellants, addressed arguments before us based on the grounds in the appeal memoranda. According to Mr. Pillai, having regard to the judgments delivered by this Court in various other cases pertaining to acquisition of land in Thodupuzha village pursuant to earlier notification, even the claim in the appeal, which is at the rate of Rs. 86450/- per Are in the first four cases and at the rate of Rs. 1,23,500/- per Are in the next two cases, is very low.

(3.) All the submissions of Mr. Chandran Pillai were opposed by Smt. Latha T. Thankappan, learned senior Government Pleader for the respondent. According to her, the learned Subordinate Judge has fixed the market value on the basis of the evidence which was available on record.