IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2009 / 21ST JYAISHTA 1931 LA.App..No. 583 of 2000(A) -------------------------------- LAR.103/1997 of PRL.SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE ................................................ APPELLANT(S)/ RESPONDENT (S) : -------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA BY ADDL.ADVOCATE GENERAL ADV.SRI.P.K.BABU, GOVERNMENT PLEADER. RESPONDENT(S)/ CLAIMANTS: ------------------------------------------- 1. SATHYABHAMA AMMA, THEROTH HOUSE, MAYANADU P.O., KOZHIKODE. 2. SUMATHY AMMA, THEROTH HOUSE, MAYANADU P.O., KOZHIKODE. 3. SAROJINI AMMA, THEROTH HOUSE, MAYANADU P.O., KOZHIKODE. 4. LEELAVATHY AMMA, THEROTH HOUSE, MAYANADU P.O., KOZHIKODE. * ADDL.R5. SECRETARY, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. * (ADDL.5TH RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 21.2.2008 IN I.A.NO.445 OF 2008.) BY ADVS. SRI.JACOB ABRAHAM FOR R1 TO R4 SRI. POOVAPPALLY M.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, SC.KSHB FOR ADDL.R5. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/06/2009. THE COURT ON 11/06/2009 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, J J ................................................................................. L.A.A.NO.583 OF 2000 ........................................ Dated this the 11th day of June, 2009. .................................................... J U D G M E N T PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J. Heard Mr.P.K.Babu, learned Government Pleader, and Mr.Jacob Abraham, the learned counsel for the respondent. The impugned judgment is passed by the Sub Court, Kozhikode in L.A.R.No.103/97. The acquisition was for the purpose of implementing Medical College Housing Accommodation Scheme as per Section 4(1) notification published on 30.10.1979. The property was in Chevayur Village and the Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value @ Rs.1,109.39 per cent. Since the claimant has not filed any application for reference u/s.18 of the Land Acquisition Act he could not seek enhancement of compensation. However he came to know that Ext.A1 judgment has been passed by the reference court in respect of another item of property acquired for the same purpose pursuant to the very same notification. The claimant therefore applied u/s.28 A, for redetermination of the value of acquired property. The appeal filed against Ext.A1 judgment and decree was L.A.A.NO.583 OF 2000 2 dismissed. The claimant preferred a request for reference u/s 28 (A)(3), which was allowed and that was how the reference came up before the reference court. Under the impugned judgment, the reference Court answered the reference refixing the market value at Rs.3,000/-. This Court notices that what is granted to the claimant under the impugned judgment is even lesser than the rates which was granted to the party in Ext.A1. It was not disputed before us that Ext.A1 has attained finality. Under this circumstance, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment at the instance of the Government. The appeal will stand dismissed. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. ami.