~~~~~~~~~~~ T.R.Ramachandran Nair, J. This appeal is from the judgment and decree in L.A.R.No.53/2008 of the Sub Court, Kottayam. The property was acquired for the construction of Bye-pass road at Changanassery IIIrd Reach and the notification under Section 4(1) was issued on 20.1.2005. The extent of land involved is 2.84 Ares which is a dry land comprised in survey No.13-2 of Changanassery Village. The claimant contended that this property is situated in the heart of Changanessry Muncipal Town and so many important establishments are near the acquired properly like KSRTC Bus stand, Assumption College, S.H. School, private bus stand, S.B. College, N.S.S. College, Govt. High School etc. which have at a distance of 750 metres from the acquired property which is lying on the side of Changanassery-Kaviyoor road.
2. Apart from the same, he had claimed reassessment of the value of structures. Compensation for injurious affection was also sought for. Before the reference court, evidence was let in and Exts.A1 and A2 have been marked and respondents Exhibits have been marked as R1 to R3. Exts.C1, C1(a) and C1(b) are the report of the Commissioner and the rough sketch. AWs 1 to 4 have also been examined.
3. The land value has been fixed at Rs.51,870/- per Are by the reference court. The Land Acquisition Officer has awarded land value at the rate of Rs.25,234/- after including the property in A category.
4. As regards the enhancement sought for the building and the compound wall eventhough the claimant relied upon the Commission report, the court below did not grant anything towards the same. It was claimed by the claimant that the building has only 11 years in age, whereas the Land Acquisition Officer has treated the building having 23 years of age.
5. 50% of the value of the land has to be fixed as compensation for injurious affection for severing his land and reducing the the remaining property to a bit of land. The extent of land involved is 36 sq.m.
6. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant, Sri.James Kurian and the learned senior counsel Sri.Aloysius Thomas. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in relation to the very same acquisition this Court has granted enhanced land value at Rs.1,71,255/- per Are by a series of judgments. Out attention was invited to the judgments in L.A.A.No.857/2010 and L.A.ANo.859/2010.
7. We find from the reading of the judgments that therein the land value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer was at the rate of Rs.23,222/- per Are and the reference court had enhanced land value of Rs.37,155/- per Are and finally this Court re-fixed the land value at Rs.1,71,255/- per Are.
8. The learned senior Government Pleader submitted that above shown is the value adopted by this Court. As regards the value of the structures, this Court has been granting 30% above the value adopted by the Land Acquisition Officer since the rate adopted by the PWD cannot be the market value all the time. Therefore, the said method can be adopted herein also. Since we find that the land value can be re-fixed, for the injurious affection as the reference court has adopted 50% of the market value, the same method can be adopted herein also. Accordingly, we allow the appeal as the land value of the acquired property is re-fixed as Rs.1,71,255/- per Are. As regards the value of the structures, the claimant will be entitled for 30% over the value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer and for injurious affection also, he is entitled for 50% of the land value as fixed by this Court, for the extent of 36 sq.m.
Since there was delay of 1228 days in filing the appeal, this Court while allowing the application for condoning delay, namely, C.M.Appln.No.1027/2014, made it clear that the claimant will not be entitled for the statutory benefits namely for interest under Section 28 for the above period and we reiterate the same. No costs.
Sd/- T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.
sd/- P.V.ASHA, JUDGE.
Ps/8/12/2014