Ramachandran Nair, J.
Both these appeals are filed by the State aggrieved by the judgments in L.A.R.Nos.163/2006 and 162/2006 respectively.
2. The Section 4(1) notification was published on 26.07.2003 and the properties were acquired for the widening of M.C.Road under the Kerala State Transport Project. The land acquisition officer awarded land value @ Rs. 38,585/- per Are.
3. The court below has refixed the land value at Rs. 1,50,000/- per Are relying upon Ext.A1 judgment in L.A.R.No.200/2005 and 201/2005. The learned Senior Government Pleader submitted that the reliance placed on the said judgment is not correct. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the acquired properties are in an important locality and the properties are very near to Pandalam town and very near to Adoor Municipality and Vadakkadathukavu town. We find from the judgment in L.A.R.No.163/2006 that, AW1 was examined, who has stated about the importance of the acquired property. It is a dry land and there were two Anjali trees, two jack trees, two coconut trees and two cashew nut trees.
4. It is true that the reference court has relied upon Ext.A1 judgment. The value fixed by the land acquisition officer is @ Rs. 38,585/- per Are and we have by judgment rendered today in L.A.A.No.510/2009 and 529/2013 - wherein the land acquisition officer had awarded the same rate and the reference court enhanced it to Rs. 3 lakhs - the judgment has been confirmed.
Herein the land value fixed is only Rs. 1,50,000/- per Are in both the cases. Since the notification in all these cases is the same and the value adopted by the land acquisition officer is also the same and as the land value fixed by the reference court is half of the land value awarded in similar references from which L.A.A.No.510/2009 and 529/2013 arose, we find no reason to interfere with the decree passed by the reference court and accordingly, we dismiss the appeals. No cost.
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE sv. P.V.ASHA, JUDGE