LILLY THOMAS Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE claimant is in appeal. Her property in Ernakulam Village was acquired pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 21/7/2003 for the purpose of construction of Pullepady over bridge. THE Land Acquisition Officer fixed the land value at the rate of Rs.3,20,818/-. THEre was a small structure on the property for which the Land Acquisition Officer awarded Rs.10,731/- as compensation. Before the Reference Court the evidence consisted of Ext.A3 sale deed and the report of the commissioner who conducted the local inspection. THE commissioner reported that the property was very valuable situated only at a distance of 200 metres from the margin of Chittoor road, Ext.A3 though executed in 1995 reflected a land value of Rs.5,05,982.41 per cent. THEre was a building on Ext.A3 property and for that building separate value of Rs.5 Lakhs is seen paid. THE learned Subordinate Judge did not place reliance on Ext.A3. Apart from the claim for land value, the appellant had a claim for compensation for injurious affection on the reason that the balance property remaining under the ownership of the claimant had been reduced practically to a valueless irregular plot. THE commissioner's report was to the effect that the newly constructed over bridge was to a considerable extent over the remainder property of the appellant.

(2.) THE learned Subordinate Judge did not rely on Ext.A3 stating that Ext.A3 property took in a double storeyed building also and no separate value for the building was shown in Ext.A3. However, relying on the commissioner's report, the learned Subordinate Judge found that remainder property of the appellant was injuriously affected and fixed the percentage of diminution at 50%. After discarding Ext.A3, what the learned Subordinate Judge did was to apply the rule of thumb and to enhance the land value by 75% over what was awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. Accordingly, the land value was refixed at Rs.5,61,246/- per Are. At that rate 50% value was given for the unacquired property extending to 1.4 Ares. Thus, Rs.4,04,098/- was awarded towards injurious affection.

(3.) THE learned Government Pleader requested that this court may not fix the compensation finally and the LAR case be remanded to the Reference Court so that both sides can adduce further evidence enabling the Reference Court to pass revised award on the basis of the entirety of the evidence which comes on record. In view of the request of the learned senior Government Pleader, we are inclined to pass an order of remand.