P.N. GOPINATHAN, AGED 75 YEARS, S/O VASEKUTTY, PARAPPATTU HOUSE, THITTAMEL MURI CHENGANNUR VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK, Vs. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE SPL. TAHASILDAR LA GENERAL, ALAPPUZHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.)

(2.) THE claimants are the appellants. Their land extending to 0.24 Ares situated in Chengannur village within the limits of Chengannur municipal town together with a building situated thereon was acquired for the purpose of development of the Adoor -Chengannur link of MC Road. The issue involved in this appeal is only to the correct market value to be awarded to the land in question. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs. 98,634/ - per Are. Before the Reference Court the appellants placed reliance on Ext.A1. Ext.A1 was a pre -notification document executed six years prior to the notification under Section 4(1) in this case which was on 03/06/05. Ext.A1 reflected the land value at the rate of Rs. 4,30,379.75/ - per L. A. A. No. 373 of 2011 -2 -Are. The Commissioner in Ext.C1 reported that the distance between Ext.A1 property and the property under acquisition was only 25 metres and that they were situated on either sides of the MC Road. The learned Subordinate Judge did not place reliance on Ext.A1 taking the view that Ext.A1 reflected a fancy price. It appears that the learned Subordinate Judge was not happy with Ext.C1 also. Ultimately what the learned Subordinate Judge did was to fix the market value at Rs. 3 lakhs per Are accepting the oral evidence adduced by the parties.

(3.) SRI .Saju S., the learned counsel for the appellants addressed us in detail. He submitted that relying on Ext.A1 the correct market value of the property will come to Rs. 6 lakhs. He even pointed out that in subsequent cases, the very same learned Subordinate Judge has re -fixed the land value of identical land at Rs. 5 lakhs per Are. He requested that the appeal be allowed in full.