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 15TH JULY 2009 / 24TH ASHADHA 1931 LA.App..No. 378 of 2007(D) -------------------------- LAR.92/2003 of ADDL.SUB COURT,KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT IN THE LAR ------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT IN THE LAR ----------------------------------- K.A.MOHAMMED, S/O. ABDUL KHADER, KOZHIPPALLIL, VADAYAR VILLAGE. (POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER OF SRI.K.A.KAYI, KOZHIPPALLIL) ADV. SRI.MATHEW PHILIP EDAPPALLIL THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/07/2009, ALONG WITH L.A.A.NO.378/2007 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.Nos.378 & 1445/2007 ------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. We do not find any ground to admit these appeals, which pertain to acquisition of land in Vadayur Village, for the purpose of construction of Palamkadavu Bridge pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 24/5/1999. 2. L.A.A. No.1445/2007 is preferred by the claimant who is not satisfied by the enhancement granted. According to us, finding of the learned Subordinate Judge that the correct market value of the property under acquisition is 60% above the value fixed by the land acquisition officer, is founded on evidence. But, the claimant in his appeal seriously seeks for an order of remand so as to enable him to adduce better evidence. 3. In view of the submission of the learned counsel for the claimant that if order of remand is passed, the claimant will be able to adduce better evidence before the reference court regarding the correct market value of the acquired property, we are inclined to set aside the judgment under appeal and remand L.A.A..Nos.378 & 1445/2007 2 L.A.R. No.92/2003 to the Additional Sub Court,Kottayam. The Sub court will afford opportunity to both sides to adduce whatever evidence they want to. That court will pass revised judgment on the basis of the entire evidence which comes on record. Since the remand order is necessitated due to the fault of the claimant, we are not inclined to order refund of court fee. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE dpk