IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 17TH AUGUST 2009 / 26TH SRAVANA 1931 LA.App..No. 843 of 2005() ----------------------------------- LAR.18/2002 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,ALAPPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): 2ND RESPONDENT: ----------------------------- THE CHIEF MANAGER (HR), NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CORPORATION LTD., NANGIARKULANGARA, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADVS.MR.K.ANAND (A.201) SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS & 1ST RESPONDENT: ---------------------------- 1. SATHIAMMA, JAYABHAVANAM, CHEPPAD, KIZHAKKUMMURI, CHEPPAD VILLAGE. 2. JAYAKUMAR, DO. DO. 3. JAYAPRASAD, DO. DO. 4. JAYASREE, DO. DO. 5. JAYARANJINI, DO. DO. 6. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA (SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) NO.III, S.T.P.S. HARIPAD. R6 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.P.N.SUMANGALA THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= L.A.A. No. 843 of 2005 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 17th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J. This is an appeal by the requisitioning authority. We are of the view that the service of notice on the respondents can be declared sufficient. Respondents 2 to 6 who are the legal heirs of the 1st respondent have been duly served. Notice to respondents 4 and 5 returned unclaimed. We declare that respondents 4 and 5 also duly served. Notice to the 3rd respondent is returned stating out of India. But we find that the 3rd respondent is paling with respondents 4, 5 and 6. There is no conflicting interest between the 3rd respondent and other party respondents in this appeal. They were represented by the same counsel. 2. In this appeal preferred by the requisitioning authority they challenge the enhancement of the value of the property under acquisition from Rs.2,142/- per Are to Rs.17,858/- per Are. 3. Having heard the submissions of Smt. Latha Krishnan, the learned counsel for the appellant and Smt. P.N.Sumangala, the learned Government Pleader, we are of the view that the enhancement granted by the reference L.A.A.No 843/05 2 court is excessive. According to us, on a better assessment of market value of the land under acquisition would be fixed at Rs.6,500/- per Are. Setting aside the judgment and decree under appeal, we re-fix the value of the land under acquisition at Rs.6,500/- per Are. The appeal stands allowed, but without any order as to costs. Needless to say the claimants will be entitled to all statutory benefits on the total enhanced compensation to which they become eligible by virtue of this judgment. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE. mn.