IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 1ST OCTOBER 2009 / 9TH ASWINA 1931 LA.App..No. 255 of 2006(C) ------------------------------- LAR.91/2003 of PRL.SUB COURT,KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT. --------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LATHA T. THANKAPPAN RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT. -------------------------------- RASHEEDA BEEVI, W/O.SHAMSUDHEEN, ISMALIYA BUILDING, THALAYOLAPPARAMBU. ADV. SRI.MATHEW PHILIP EDAPPALLIL FOR R1 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.255 of 2006 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 1st day of October, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J Sri.Mathew Philip Edappallil submits that the claimant has also preferred an appeal as L.A.A.226/06 against the impugned judgment. He requested that both the appeals be consolidated. 2. Smt.Latha T. Thankappan, the learned senior Government Pleader draws our attention to the judgment of this Court in L.A.A.378/07 and L.A.A.145/07. They were cases pertaining to the same acquisition. We notice that under that judgment, we have observed that grant of enhancement up to 60% will be justified on the evidence. In the instance case, L. A. A. No.255 of 2006 -2- the percentage of enhancement is only 54%. Under the above circumstances, we are not inclined to entertain this appeal preferred by the Government. Sri.Mathew Philip's request for remand will be considered when the appeal preferred by the claimant comes up for consideration. This appeal is dismissed. No costs. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE K. SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE kns/-