KAITHAMANNIL RAZIYA Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The claimant is the appellant. Her property in Cheekode village was acquired for the purpose of construction of Edasserikadavu Bridge and approached road pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 02/05/07. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs. 13,333/- per cent. There was a building on the land under acquisition. But as there is no claim in this appeal for enhanced building value we need have to be concerned only with the correctness of the land value awarded by the Reference Court.

(2.) Before the Reference Court the appellant produced Exts.A1 to A3. All these documents reflected a higher land value. Ext.A3 was the nearest of all the three to the date of L. A. A No.89 of 2012 -2-publication of the notification. The documents which were marked as Exts.A1 and A2 were post notification documents. Ext.A3 was the only pre-notification document. Ext.A3 reflected a land value of Rs. 22,100/- per cent. The learned Subordinate Judge placed reliance on Ext.A3. Noticing that unlike the properties under acquisition which were enjoying the frontage of Ootty-Kozhikode State Highway, Ext.A3 property was enjoying frontage of only a private road. The learned Subordinate Judge added 5% to the value reflected in Ext.A3 and re-fixed the land value at Rs. 23,205/- per Are.

(3.) In this appeal various grounds are raised urging that Ext.A1 which reflected a land value of Rs. 2,55,000/- per cent should have been relied on.