Ramachandran Nair,J. Both these appeals are connected and they are respectively from LAR Nos.311/2005 and 318/05 of Sub Court, Pathanamthitta. Both these cases were tried together and disposed of by a common judgment.
2. We heard Sr. Government Pleader Sri.Aloysious Thomas, for the State and the learned counsel, Sri. T.K Koshy, for the respondents.
3. As far as the acquisition is concerned it is for the purpose of Adoor bye-pass road. The notification under Section 4(1) was issued on 03.02.05. The above work is part of Kerala State Transport Project. In LAR No.311/05, the Land Acquisition Officer fixed the land value at the rate of Rs.6,841/-per Are. In LAR No.318/05 Land Acquisition Officer fixed the land value at the rate of Rs.2,438/- per Are. In LAR No. 318/05 it has been enhanced by the court below to Rs.1,40,000/- per Are, and in LAR No. 311/05, the land value has been enhanced to Rs.1,50,000/- per Are.
4. Learned Sr. Govt.Pleader submitted that mainly the court below has relied upon Ext.A1, the judgment in LAR
L.A.A.Nos. 743 of 2011 & 766 of 2011
2
No. 326/05. The State had filed LAA No. 342/11 against the said judgment and by a separate judgment rendered today this Court has remanded the matter for fresh consideration. Therefore, the learned Senior Govt.Pleader submitted that these cases also may be remanded back.
5. While opposing the above plea for remand, learned counsel for the claimant submitted that apart from the Ext.A1 judgment, the Reference Court has discussed the importance of the land, its potential and other advantages.
6. The discussion of the evidence is in paragraph 19 of the judgment. Therein the reference is made in Ext.A1 judgment. The claimants plea was that the acquired property was better than the property involved in Ext.A1 judgment. We find that the plea by the learned Sr.Govt.Pleader for remand is justified, in the light of the fact that the court below has compared the advantages of the acquired property to that of the property involved in Ext.A1 judgment, which we have already set aside.
In that view of the matter, it requires a remand the matter for fresh consideration. It is up to the claimant to adduce evidence with regard to the nature of the property, its importance etc. The judgments are accordingly set aside and
L.A.A.Nos. 743 of 2011 & 766 of 2011
3
the appeals are allowed. The matters are remanded for fresh consideration by the Reference Court and the parties will appear on 06.01.2015.
Sd/-T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge.
lsn Sd/-P.V.ASHA, Judge.