Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

9. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the claimants and respondent in Appeal No.75/2023 where the amount of compensation has been exponentially increased to Rs.9,88,400/-, submitted that after remand claimants examined themselves a fresh and brought on record the judgment in LAR No.25/2013, 1/13 and 58/2013, Exts.A3 and A4. But the reference court noticing that the acquired land was just 50 mteres away from Ayur- Anchal road accessible by a country road, much less, a dry land could easily fetch a market value of not less than Rs.4 lakhs per cent, which comes to Rs.9,88,400/- per Are, granted the same amount, therefore such amount of compensation awarded by the reference court after remand should be applied to all the cases by doing away with the belting system. In other words, it was submitted that in the other claims also which are pending before the remand, the ratio or principles culled out in LAR No.60/2013 vide decision 2024:KER:85134 LA.APP. NO.75/2023 & con. cases dated 29.10.2022 be applied.

Respondent-State examined RW1 and brought to evidence Ext.R1 and R2. A certified copy of the Notes on Award was produced at the fag end of the trial and it is marked as Ext.R3.

19. In this case, the claimant produced Ext.A3 and A4 judgments in LAR 25/2013, LAR 1/2013 and LAR 58/2013. The notes on award show that the said judgments also pertain to properties which were acquired for the same Anchal Bypass. In LAR 25/2013, the market value of property in survey 367/22 of Anchal Village which came in category (viii) was determined. This property was a wetland with no access to roads. As per the note to award, the market value of the said property was Rs.15,920/- per are. In Ext.A3 judgment, this was 2024:KER:85134 LA.APP. NO.75/2023 & con. cases enhanced to Rs. 2,21,782/- per are. In LAR 1/2013, the market value of the property in survey number 358/23 of Edamulackal Village, which was a property in category (vi) which was a wetland with access to panchayat road was determined; the market value was enhanced to Rs.2,21,782/- per are from Rs. 19,104/- per are. In LAR 58/2013, the market value of the property in survey number 66/23 in Edamulackal Village which was property in category (viii) which was a wetland with no road access was determined; the market value was enhanced to Rs. 2,21,782/- per are from Rs. 15, 920/- per are.

15. We cannot also remain unmindful of the fact that in respect of LAR No.62/2013 pertaining to category VII which has been assailed by the State in LAApp.87 of 2023, Reference Court assessed the compensation at the rate of Rs.3,20,000/-. Paragraph Nos.32, 33 and 34 of the judgment of reference court dated 24.09.2022 in LAR No.62/2013 reads as under:

32. Point No.1 and 2: The acquired land which is the basis of LAR 59/2013 comes in survey number 66/20 of Edamulakkal Village. In the notes on the award, this property is categorised as a property which is a wetland without any road access. It is included as category number viii and the land value was fixed as Rs. 15,920/- per are.

In Ext.A15 and A16 judgment the land value of wetland without road access was enhanced to Rs. 2,21,782/- per are. From the notes of award, it is clear that the property in LAR 59/2013 and Ext.A15 and A16 judgments are also in category viii. The land value of the property in Ext.A15 and A16 were also enhanced from Rs. 15,920/- per are to Rs. 2,21,782/- per are. From the evidence adduced by the 2024:KER:85134 LA.APP. NO.75/2023 & con. cases claimant it is not clear whether the property in LAR 59/2013 is identical to the property in LAR 62/2013 and LAR 63/2013. In Ext.C1 report, the property in LAR 59/2013 is reported to be next to the Ganapathy temple but 50 meters away from the Edamulackal-Anchal road. As per Ext.C1, the said property is not a wetland. Considering the fact that the property acquired in LAR 59/2013 is close to a worship place and that it is not a wetland, I find that the property acquired has a better market value than the basic document land. The basic document land is a wetland with no road access. At the same time, the acquired land in LAR 59/2013 cannot have a market value equivalent to the properties in LAR 62/2013 and LAR 63/2013. The acquired property must have a value higher than the properties covered by Ext.A15 and A16 judgments as the property mentioned in the said judgments are wetlands with no road access. Accordingly, I find that considering the potentiality of the acquired land being adjacent to the temple and the fact that it is not a wetland, I find that the market value of the acquired land in LAR 59/2013 can be Rs. 2,50,000/- per are. This is equivalent to Rs. 1,01,174/- per cent. I find that this is a reasonable price for the acquired land.