AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Pius C. Kuriakose, J.—The claimant is the appellant. His wet land in Kaduthuruthy Village was acquired pursuant to Section 4 (1) notification published on 4/11/2003 for the purpose of construction of the Government Poly Technic. The LAO awarded land value at the rate of Rs. 926/- per Are. The Reference Court under the impugned judgment refixed the land value at Rs. 1250/- per Are. According to the appellant, the rate refixed by the Reference Court is inadequate. We have heard the submissions of Sri. Francis Joseph Kurisunkal learned counsel for the appellant and those of Sri. S. Jamal learned senior Government Pleader.
The learned counsel for the appellant would draw our attention to our own judgment in L.A.A. No. 855/2010 and submit that under that judgment value of identical property has been refixed by this court at Rs. 4,100/- per Are. The learned senior Government Pleader submitted that it is not correct to say that the property involved in this appeal is comparable to the property which was subject matter of L.A.A. No. 855/2010. The property which was subject matter of L.A.A. No. 855/2010 was reclaimed wet land with coconut trees unlike the property in this appeal which was wet land only.
Having considered the submissions addressed at the Bar we are of the view that paragraph 4 of the judgment in L.A.A. No. 855/2010 give sufficient guidance as to the decision to be taken in this appeal. Reading of that paragraph will show that the value of the property identical to the property involved in this appeal was refixed by this court in L.A.A. No. 1510/2010 at Rs. 2525/- per Are. Ordinarily we would have been inclined to allow this appeal and refix the market value of the land under acquisition at Rs. 2525/- per Are. But, the learned senior Government Pleader would point out that the property under acquisition involved in this case is a fairly large extent. We do notice that the total extent of the property under acquisition is 39.77 Ares. Keeping in mind the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Land Acquisition Officer and Sub-Collector, Gadwal Vs. Smt. Sreelatha Bhoopal and another, , Gafar and Others Vs. Moradabad Development Authority and Another, and State of Jammu & Kashmir Vs. Mohammad Mateen Wani and Others, we are of the view that towards largeness of the extent, at least 5% should be deducted. Deducting 5% we refix the value of land under acquisition at Rs. 2272/- per Are. which we round off to Rs. 2270/- per Are. The appeal is allowed refixing the market value of land under acquisition at Rs. 2270/- per Are.
The appellant will be entitled for all statutory benefits subject to the conditions this court has imposed while passing order in C.M. Appln. 575/2012. Decree copy will be issued only after ensuring that the appellant has remitted full court fee payable on the appeal memorandum. Parties will suffer their respective costs.