IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2009 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1930 LA.App..No. 221 of 2009() ------------------------- LAR.59/2001 of PRL.SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT(S): 1ST RESPONDENT ---------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL TASHILDAR (LA),KOZHIKODE. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.K.BABU RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT & RESPONDENT NO.2. ------------------------------------------ 1. K.P.ABDUL AZEEZ, S/O.KALANTHAN,KUNNATH PADIKKAL HOUSE P.O. KARANTHOOR. 2. INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT,KOZHIKODE . THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.No.221 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius.C.Kuriakose, J. We are not inclined to admit this appeal. The case pertains to acquisition of land in Kunnamangalam village for the purpose of widening of the road leading towards Indian Institute of Management pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 14/01/1999. The land acquisition officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.32,126/- per Are relying on Ext.B1 basis document. The evidence before the reference court consisted of Exts.A1 to A4, Ext.C1 to C8 and the oral testimony of AW1 claimant on the side of the claimant. On the side of the Government, the evidence consisted only of Exts.B1 and B2 Topo sketch. Absolutely, no counter oral evidence was adduced by the government. Importantly, the Government did not take steps for cross examining the Commissioner who had recommended for much higher value than what is presently fixed by the reference court i.e. Rs. 60,000/- per cent. LAA.No.221/09 2 2. We have gone through the judgment of the reference court. We find that the learned Subordinate Judge placed reliance mainly on Ext.A2 which was common judgment in L.A.R.No.430/03 and 15/2003. L.A.R.No.430/2000 subject to appeal L.A.A.No.1251/08. But it is seen that in that L.A.A. memorandum of cross objections has been filed by the claimant. Ext.A2 was admittedly in respect of property situated very near to the property in this case. Under Ext.A2 land value fixed by the reference court was the same as the value fixed in this case. But Ext.A2, we find is the common judgment in two cases including L.A.R.No.15/2003. As regards LAR.No.15/2003 , the government has not preferred any appeal so far. Thus it can be said that to the extent it relates to L.A.R.No.15/2003, Ext.A2 has attained finality. Apart from Ext.A2, learned Subordinate Judge's decision is supported by the Commissioner's report and also by Ext.A1 which revealed a land value of Rs. 50,000/-. The learned Judge rightly noticed that the property covered by Ext.A1 was slightly inferior to the acquired property. More over, we find that the total stakes involved in the appeal is around Rs. 30,000/- only. LAA.No.221/09 3 For all these reasons, we are not inclined to admit this appeal. The appeal will stand dismissed. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE sv. LAA.No.221/09 4