IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 4TH DECEMBER 2009 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 LA.App..No. 1464 of 2008() -------------------------- LAR.36/2003 of ADL.SUB COURT, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S): -------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), N.H. KANNUR. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SHYSON P. MANGUZHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. K.KUNHIMANNI, D/O CHANDU,MUZHAPPILANGAD (DIED). 2. K.SARASWATHI, D/O LATE KUNHIMANNI, KUTTIYADI HOUSE, MUZHAPPILANGAD AMSOM, KANNUR TALUK. 3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,ROADS AND BRIDGES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, ERNAKULAM. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... L.A.A.No.1464 OF 2008 ............................................. Dated this the 4th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award in LAR.No.36/2003 of the Land Acquisition Court, Thalassery. 0.0066 hectares of land comprised in R.S.No.233/3 B of Muzhappilangad village was acquired for the construction of a railway bridge. An amount of Rs.22,778/= was fixed by the land acquisition officer and the land acquisition court in a reference fixed the land value at Rs.17,500/= per cent for the land acquired. It is against that decision, the State has come up in appeal. 2.The learned Land Acquisition Judge had referred to Ext.A1, a judgment in LAR.27/2003. LAR.No.27/2003 was taken in appeal as LAA.No.74/2008 and it had been disposed of by this Court by affirming the award on 25.5.2009. A perusal of the award would reveal that all characteristics attributable to the land involved in LAR.No.27/2003 are squarely applicable to the land in the reference also. So, the court below fixed the land value at Rs.17,500/= per cent. : 2 : L.A.A.No.1464 OF 2008 3. Since that judgment has become final and the present land acquired is similar and similarly situated, nothing further remains to be considered for the reason that a reasonable land value has been fixed. Therefore, the appeal lacks merit and it is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 3 : L.A.A.No.1464 OF 2008