IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 15TH MARCH 2011 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1932 LA.App..No. 1190 of 2010() -------------------------- LAR.165/1996 of ADDL.SUB COURT,PARAVUR .................... APPELLANT/ADDL.2ND RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------------- KOCHI REGINERIES LTD.,(NOW BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.,KOCHI REFINERY). BY ADV. MR.E.K.NANDAKUMAR MS.THUSHARA JAMES RESPONDENTS/CLAIMANTS & IST RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------------------------- 1. SURENDRAN NAIR,S/O.THANKAPPAN NAIR, RADHALAYAM,VELOOR KARA,KARIMUGAL.(DIED). 2. PRASANNA,W/O.SURENDRAN NAIR,RADHALAYAM, VELOOR KARA,KARIMUGAL. 3. SHAM KUMAR.S.K,S/O.LATE SURENDRAN NAIR, RADHALAYAM,VELOOR KARA,KARIMUGAL. 4. SARATH SURENDRAN,S/O.LATE SURENDRAN NAIR RADHALAYAM,VELOOR KARA,KARIMUGAL. 5. SARANYA SURENDRAN, D/O.LATE SURENDRAN NAIR,RADHALAYAM VELOOR KARA, KARIMUGAL. 6. THANKAPPAN NAIR,S/O.LATE VASU PILLAI, VELOOR KARA,KARIMUGAL COLONY.P.O,PUTHENCRUZ.(DIED) 7. THANKAMMA,W/O.THANKAPPAN NAIR, VELOOR KARA,KARIMUGAL COLONY.P.O, PUTHENCRUZ. 8. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR(LA),KOCHI REFINERIES LTD, VYTTILA,KOCHI-682019. ADV. MR.C.CHANDRASEKHARAN FOR R2-5 & 7 MR.P.VISWANATHA MENON FOR R2-5 & 7 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: LA.App..No. 1190 of 2010 ORDER ON I.A.NO.3942/2010 DISMISSED. 15.3.2011 SD/- HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE. // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE. HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------ LA.A.No.1190 Of 2009 ---------------------- Dated this the 15th day of March, 2011. J U D G M E N T An extent of 0.0180 hectors of land owned by the claimants was acquired for the purpose of expansion of Cochin Refineries. Section 4(1) notification was dated 1.1.1994. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded Rs.19,440/- per Are. The claim of the claimants for enhanced compensation was considered by the reference court. The claimants relied on Annexure 1 judgment and oral evidence of AW1. The reference court relied on Annexure 1 judgment of the same court in a similar reference namely, L.A.R.No.203/1995, for granting enhancement. On a perusal of Annexure 1 judgment the reference court observed that the land covered by Annexure 1 judgment and the present land under acquisition are acquired for the very same purpose under the very same notification. The Land Acquisition Officer also awarded the same land value for the land in Annexure 1 judgment. The reference court in Annexure 1 judgment awarded enhancement of land value by 59.60% in excess of the land value awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. The same yardstick was ::2:: L.A.A.No.1190 Of 2010 adopted in this case also. In the circumstances, the land value fixed by the reference court and the consequent award of statutory benefits is just and proper. The appeal is without any merit and accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. bkn/-