IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2009 / 5TH SRAVANA 1931 LA.App..No.1797 of 2007 (D) -------------------------------- LAR.124/1999 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANTS & ADDL.3RD CLAIMANT --------------------------------------------------------- 1. DEVAKI AMMA, D/O.BHAGAVATHY AMMA, T.C. 20/1948, 'SARATH', KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (DIED) 2. SARADA AMMA, D/O.BHAGAVATHY AMMA, T.C.20/1948, 'SARATH', KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. B.VENUGOPALAN NAIR, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, T.C.20/1624, 'SARATH', SASTHRI NAGAR, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SMT.M.HEMALATHA RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LATHA T. THANKAPPAN THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & P. Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ C. M. Application No.2188 of 2007 & L. A. A. No.1797 of 2007 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 27th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J C. M. Application No.2188 of 2007 Delay of 348 days in filing the appeal will stand condoned on condition that the appellants pay a sum of Rs.600/- to the Kerala Mediation Centre by way of cost today itself and produce receipt before this Court. Smt.Hemalatha, the learned counsel for the appellants assures us that the amount will be readily paid. Accepting that assurance, we are considering the appeal for admission and final disposal. L.A.A.1797/07 Even though several grounds have been raised in this memorandum of appeal preferred by the claimant L. A. A. No.1797 of 2007 -2- who is aggrieved by the award of the Land Acquisition Reference Court in LAR No.124/99, only one ground appeals to us. The ground is that the court below went wrong in not awarding interest on the solatium component of the total enhanced compensation. The above ground is to be accepted in view of the pronouncement of the Supreme Court in Sunder v. Union of India [2001(3) KLT 489 (SC)]. Following the judgment of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in that case, we modify the impugned judgment and decree to the extent of clarifying that the solatium component of the total enhanced compensation allowed under the impugned award will also carry interest at the statutory rates mentioned in Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act. L. A. A. No.1797 of 2007 -3- This L.A.A is disposed of as above. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE P. Q. BARKATH ALI JUDGE kns/-