Court found reliance on post-notification market value inappropriate, necessitating reevaluation of land acquisition.

JUDGMENT

The claimant in L.A.R.No.184 of 2013 has filed this appeal aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 25.09.2015 passed by the Sub Court, Thodupuzha.

2. An extent of 0.7 Ares of land comprised in Survey No.17/36 of Block No.10 of Manakkad Village in Thodupuzha Taluk, was acquired from the appellant for the second extension of Thodupuzha – Ramamangalam Road. Several Land Acquisition References were considered, arising from the same acquisition, by the Sub Court, Thodupuzha. The learned Sub Judge relied on a post notification transaction to fix the market value of the properties acquired. In L.A.App. No.36 of 2016 and connected cases, this Court found that the impugned judgments and decrees were liable to be set aside for the reason that the learned Sub Judge had relied on a post notification transaction. Accordingly the appeals were allowed and the matters were remitted for fresh consideration by the learned Sub Judge. Following the said judgment, I have also disposed of similar appeals by judgment dated

17.12.2025 in L.A.A No.24 of 2024 and connected matters.

3. In view of the above, the impugned judgment and decree in this appeal is also set aside. The Land Acquisition Reference is remitted for fresh consideration by the learned Sub Judge. Since the notification was of the year 2010, the learned Sub Judge shall endeavour to dispose the reference within a period of five months.

This appeal is disposed of as above.

Sd/-