LAWS(KER)-1979-12-17

MARIAM Vs. STATE

Decided On December 10, 1979
MARIAM Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are appeals against the same judgment, that of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Parur, in a Land Acquisition Reference Case. The former appeal is by claimants 1, 2 and 4, while the other appeal is by the State. The claimants challenge the decision of the court below on the ground that the compensation awarded is inadequate but the State's complaint is that the amount awarded is excessive.

(2.) The acquisition was of 29.39 Ares of land comprised in Sy. Nos. 243/ 9B1, 243/10B2, 243/10C3 and 244/4-4 of Alwaye Village in Alwaye Taluk. The acquisition was pursuant to a notification under S.3(1) dated 22 11 1972. The property was acquired for forming the Alwaye Bye pass in the National Highway. The Land Acquisition Officer determined land value separately for 1.21 Ares, 9.51 Ares, 1.86 Ares, 14.36 Ares and2 Ares and 45sq.m. The different values given for these are Rs. 2000/-per Are, Rs. 1500/-per Are, Rs. 1500/-per Are, Rs. 1000/-per Are and Rs. 1500/-per Are respectively. On the application for reference, the reference court had taken up proceedings for enhancement.

(3.) Though the Land Acquisition Officer seems to have determined land value based on sale deeds, Exts. B5 to B7, no attempt has been made to prove these documents properly by examining persons concerned with their execution. For this reason the court below has rightly said that reliance on these documents cannot be placed. On the side of the claimants reliance was placed on Exts. A1 and A2 sale deeds of lands in the area and also Ext. A4 judgment in L.A.R. No 133 and 136 of 1973 of the same court. The court below found that Exts. A1 and A2 were not of use as indicating value of comparable land. Evidently it was not impressed with Ext. A4 also. Having stated so the court proceeded to determine what it considered as reasonable enhancement. Without indicating any logical reason it determined the enhancement at cent per cent and observed that such an end would "meet the ends of justice". It adopted the same pattern of valuation as adopted by the Land Acquisition Officer by determining the value of the acquired plot as if in five belts. The enhancement was worked on in that manner.