Ramachandran Nair, J. This appeal is filed against the judgment in L.A.R. NO.373/2005 of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Thalassery. The claimant before the court below is the appellant herein. The property acquired is having extents of 0.2472, 0.7610, 0.1790, 0.0405, 0.0600 and 0.1181 hectares of land in R.S. Nos.138/1, 138/2, 142 of Kalliassery village for the purpose of Kannur Power Project. The Land Acquisition Officer passed a total award for Rs.23,67,002/-. The property is comprised of two items by classification. Certain items of land, viz. 1.88 acres is covered by a shrimp farm known as “kaipad” and the remaining extent is garden land.
2. We heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
3. The land value assessed is at Rs.12,33,477/- per hectare for garden land and Rs.,74,735/- per hectare for “kaipad”. The reference court has enhanced the land value for garden land and fixed it at Rs.7,090/- per cent and as regards “kaipad” it has been fixed at Rs.1,000/- per cent. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the court below was not right in rejecting Exts.A1 to A3 in fixing the land value, as the properties involved in the said documents are similarly situated as that of the acquired property herein. Apart from the same, the reports of the Commissioners are also relied upon by the learned counsel.
4. The acquired properties consist of a house and other yielding trees and a portion of which was an aqua farm. We are only concerned with the claim for enhancement of the land value. The claimant has approached the Munsiff's Court for getting the value of the land and building assessed. Ext.A4 is the certified copy of the commission report and Ext.A6 is the certified copy of the plan.
5. We find from a reading of the judgment that the court below found that Exts.A1 and A2 are not comparable with the acquired property. Ext.A1 is a garden land which is having road access and the property is situated in Pappinissery village. Ext.A2 is the document concerning a paddy field wherein also road frontage is there. As regards the acquired property, it is surrounded with water on all its four sides and going by the admission of the claimant himself, there is no road frontage also to the acquired land. The property is situated in Irinavu amsom, Kalliassery Village whereas the properties involved in Exts.A1 and A2 are situated in Pappinissery which is stated to be far away from Kalliassery. In that view of the matter, Exts.A1 and A2 have been rejected by the court below and we find no reason to interfere with the same..
6. Even though Ext.A5 was relied upon, that was also not accepted by the court below. Even going by Ext.C1 report the court below concluded that the acquired property is surrounded with water, without any road access and there is only a varamba to reach the property. In that view of the matter, we do not find any reason to enhance the land value for the garden land. As regards “kaipad” property is concerned, in respect of the properties acquired for the same purpose, from the same village, in L.A.A. No.1324/2010 and connected cases we have fixed the land value for “kaipad” at Rs.3,000/- per cent. Even though in this case a sum of Rs.1,000/- alone is granted, we find that a reasonable enhancement can be granted relying upon the above judgment.
7. Accordingly, we refix the land value of “kaipad” extending 1 acre 88 cents at Rs.3,000/- per cent.
8. The next item is regarding compensation towards structure, viz.
The residential building. We find from the judgment that 20% enhancement has been granted by the court below as evident from paragraph 15 of the judgment. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that as being done by this Court in various cases, the claimant is entitled to 30% increase over the value fixed by the P.W.D., since P.W.D. rates are below the market value.
9. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant and heard learned Senior Government Pleader also. We grant 30% increase over the value assessed by the Land Acquisition Officer for the value of structures.
We summarise the relevant findings below:-
As far as the value of garden land is concerned, we confirm the award of the reference court. As far as “kaipad” property is concerned, the land value is enhanced from Rs.1,000/- to Rs.3,000/- and the value of structure is enhanced by 30% over and above the value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer. We make it clear that the appellant is entitled to all the statutory benefits granted by the court below.
No costs.
(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (P.V.ASHA, JUDGE) kav/