IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2009 / 27TH JYAISHTA 1931 LA.App..No. 635 of 2009() ------------------------- LAR.178/2001 of ADDL.SUB COURT,KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.SAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT ----------------------- VIJAYAKUMARI AMMA, GANESH VILASOM BUNGLOW, MANAYILKULANGARA CHERRY, KOLLAM WEST VILLAGE. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.NO.635 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 17th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. We are not inclined to admit this appeal, which pertains to Acquisition of land in Thrikadavoor Village for the purpose of NH pursuant to notification under Section 4(1) published on 28/6/1995. The land Acquisition officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.35405/- per Are, which was enhanced by the reference court to Rs.75,000/- per Are. It is brought to our notice that in L.A.A. No.374/2007, which was in respect of the same Acquisition but property was in a different category, the land Acquisition officer had award land value of Rs.16490/- and was refixed by the reference court at the rate of Rs.35,000/- per Are, the enhancement was approved by this court. What we find is that under the impugned judgment, proportionate increase has been given by the reference court to the claimant. Since the ratio granted by the land acquisition officer between the various categories of the properties acquired cannot be questioned by the Government, we are of the view that in view of the judgment L.A.A..No.635/2009 2 in L.A.A. No.374/2007 the impugned judgment can also be approved. Accordingly, this appeal will stand dismissed. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE dpk