The State has come up in Appeal challenging the judgment passed by the 1st Additional Subordinate Judge's Court, Thiruvananthapuram in L.A.R.No.113 of 2009.
2. An extent of 0.10 Ares of land of the claimant comprised in Sy.No.2378/A1-6 of Thycaud Village in Thiruvananthapuram Taluk was acquired from the 1st respondent herein for the widening of Pattoor - Choorakkattupalayam Road Reach -1, through notification dated 04.04.2005. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the land value per Are at ₹3,70,500/-. The claimant was dissatisfied with the same and hence the reference.
3. The court below has accepted the document relied on by the Land Acquisition Officer in Ext.R3 notes to fix the land value. The Land Acquisition Officer had considered document No.3082/2003 dated 21.08.2003 for fixing the land value. The court below has adopted the very same land value as contained in that document, and fixed it at ₹6,56,093.75 per cent as enhanced land value.
4. Heard the learned Government Pleader and perused the records. Even though the claimant had relied on Exts.A1 and A2 thereby pointing out a higher land value, the court below has chosen to rely on the document relied on by the Land Acquisition Officer in Ext.R3 for fixing the land value. The court below has clearly pointed out that the Land Acquisition Officer had nothing to point out as to how the claimant in this particular case could be discriminated from the land value shown in the document relied on by the Land Acquisition Officer himself. On going through the impugned judgment and perusing the records, this Court does not find anything to interfere with the impugned judgment. This appeal is devoid of merits, and is only to be dismissed, and I do so.
In the result, this Land Acquisition Appeal is dismissed.
There is no order as to costs.
ul/-
Sd/- B. KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE [True copy] P.S. to Judge