STATE OF KERALA Vs. SUHAIL HUSSAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) L.A.A.No.659/2010 is filed by the Government and the memorandum of cross objection is filed by the claimant/respondent. The property was in Panniyankara village. The acquisition was for the purpose of Kerala Water Authority pursuant to Section 4(1) Notification published on 28/05/1998. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.13,233/- per cent, as against the appellant's claim of Rs 3 lakhs per cent.

(2.) BEFORE the reference court the evidence adduced by the claimant consisted of Exts.A1 and A2 sale deeds and also Ext.C1 report submitted by the Commissioner. The Commissioner in Ext.C1 on the basis of what he describes on local enquiry reported that the value of the property is Rs.2 lakhs per cent.

(3.) WE have heard the submissions of Sri. Aloysius Thomas, learned Senior Government Pleader and Mr. Ramesan Nambisan, learned counsel for the respondent/claimant. We have made a quick re-appraisal of the evidence on record particularly, Exts.A1 and C1. We cannot accept the argument of Mr. Ramesan Nambisan that Ext.A1 property did not have a frontage of Calicut mini bye-pass road. It is seen from the property schedule description in Ext.A1 itself that Ext.A1 property was abutting the Calicut mini bye-pass road. The Commissioner's recommendations on the basis of local enquiry cannot be accepted, as they are not supported by the value reflected in any sale document pertaining to comparable property.