STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM AND OTHERS Vs. KURIAN S/O VARKEY, PALAKULATHIL, KUNNAPPALLY, MULAKULAM 686610

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the State challenging the judgment dated 8.11.2013 passed by the Sub Court in LAR.No. 139 of 2008. The short facts involved in the case would show that an extent of 15.20 Ares of land in Sy.No.201/5A-1 of Mulakulam Village in Vaikom Taluk was notified for acquisition for the Muvattupuzha Valley Irrigation Project in terms of Section 4(1) notification dated 28.1.2005. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs. 8,063/- per Are. The Sub Court, as per its judgment dated 30.9.2011, awarded land value at the rate of Rs. 10,885/- per Are. The claimant preferred an appeal as LAA.No.21 of 2012. Before the appellate court, the claimant contended that the property ought to have been categorised as Category II, i.e., dry land with road access, whereas the Land Acquisition Officer had categorised the property under Category IV relating to dry land and reclaimed land without any road access. The appellate court remitted the matter back to the reference court permitting the claimant to adduce further evidence in the matter. The Government was also given an opportunity to adduce further evidence.

(2.) After remand, the Sub Court fixed the land value taking into account the fact that the property comes under Category II and accordingly fixed the land value at Rs. 23,500/- per Are. In regard to the contention of the claimant that there is severance of property and injurious affection, the reference court granted compensation at Rs. 1,00,000/- for severance of land, Rs. 50,000/- for injurious affection and Rs. 22,450/- was awarded for loss of trees.

(3.) The learned Government Pleader submits that as far as the land value is concerned, the same has become final, since the reference court had adopted the value of Category II, which was fixed in other cases as well especially in LAA.No.389 of 2011 and connected cases. But, as far as the award for severance of land, injurious affection and value of trees, there was no direction by this Court in LAA.No.21 of 2012 and as such, the Sub Court committed serious error of law in considering the said claims.