ANANTHAN PILLAI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) hese appeals arise from Land Acquisition Reference No. 8 of 1958 of the Additional Subordinate Judges Court Trivandrum. A.S. No. 198 is by the claimants who seek enhancement of compensation and A.S. No. 328 is by the State for reduction of the same to what was awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer.

(2.) There was dispute between the parties about the area acquired and it was held by the court below that the land acquired was 9 acres and 6 cents in extent although the area was shown as 8 acres and 73 cents in the settlement records. This finding is not objected to by the State so that the only question for decision is the value of the land. The Land Acquisition Officer divided the plot into three belts and awarded Rs. 250/- per cent for the belt near the main road, Rs. 200/- for the next and Rs. 150/- for the belt farthest from the road. The learned Subordinate Judge declined to follow this method and he awarded compensation at a flat rate of Rs. 250/- percent of land. According to the claimants, land value should have been fixed at Rs. 275 per cent while the State contends that the enhancement made is not justified.

(3.) We are satisfied that the court below was right in declining to adopt the system of belting for valuing the land. As pointed out by Mukerji and Guha, JJ. in Nityagopal v. Secretary of State ( AIR 1933 Cal. 25 ):