0.0120 Hectors of landed property of the appellant in Resurvey No.76/16 of the Nediyiruppu Village was acquired through notification dated 07.02.1996 for the construction of the diversion road to Kondotty-Thiroorangadi road. Exhibit B2 document dated 22.04.1994 was considered by the Land Acquisition Officer for awarding compensation as the basic document. Finding that the property covered by Ext.B1 was not having a road frontage, a 15% escalation in the land value was considered, and then by alleging that the property in question is of less significance when compared to the property covered by Ext.B1, 25% reduction in land value was considered by the Land Acquisition Officer. He ultimately fixed the land value at Rs.5,256/- (Rupees Five thousand to hundred and fifty six only) per cent. Dissatisfied with the land value, the appellant, who is the claimant, approached the Subordinate Judge's Court, Manjeri through Land Acquisition Reference No.43 of 2001. 2. The Court below considered the matter along with four other connected matters. The petitioner had produced Ext.A1 Sale Deed dated 22.06.2004, by which a land was purchased by a Co-operative Society in auction and claimed that the land value covered by Ext.A1 document has to be taken note of in fixing the land value of the acquired land. The land covered by Ext.A1 was purchased by the Co-operative Bank in auction by paying a land value of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) per cent. The Court below relying on Ext.B1 found that the 25% deduction made by the Land Acquisition Officer was unjustifiable and fixed the land value at Rs.8,064/- (Rupees Eight thousand and sixty four only) per cent. Dissatisfied with the said amount fixed by the Court below, the claimant has come up in Appeal.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader. It seems that even though the appellant has claimed an amount of Rs.12,000/- (Rupees Twelve thousand only) as land value, in the valuation portion of the appeal, they have limited their claim to Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) per cent. The learned counsel for the appellant has invited the attention of this Court to the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court on 11.11.2009 in LAA No.911 of 2003 along with other connected matters, in cases wherein properties were acquired for the very same purpose, that is for the construction of the other portions of the very same road. In that case, Ext.A1 document was accepted by the Division Bench of this Court and the land value was fixed at Rs.14,000/- (Rupees Fourteen thousand only) per cent. It seems that the said property covered by Ext.A1 is situated almost four kilometers away from the property involved in this case.
4. It seems that the fixation of the land value based on Ext.B1 is clearly unjustifiable as the said property is not having any road frontage; whereas, the property acquired has got road frontage. Considering the land value fixed by the Division Bench of this Court in the cases referred to above based on Ext.A1, this Court is of the view that in this particular case much discussion is not required to fix the land value at the rate of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) per cent. Therefore, the appellant is entitled to get an enhanced compensation by fixing the land value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per cent.
5. In the result, this appeal is allowed and an enhanced land value at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per cent is granted to the appellant for the acquired land. Of course the appellant is entitled to other statutory benefits regarding solatium, interest etc. At the same time, in computing interest, a period of 1269 days and another period of 1385 days being filing delay and representation delay respectively, shall be excluded.
B. KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE sp