IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2010 / 20TH SRAVANA 1932 LA.App..No. 1124 of 2009(A) -------------------------------- LAR.90/2006 of SUB COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS ----------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, K.S.T.P., KOTTARAKKARA DIVISION. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.R.BINDU RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT ------------------------------- GEORGE THANKACHAN, PUTHENVEETTIL, KURAMPALA, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.T.K.KOSHY FOR R1 SRI.G.UDAYABHANU FOR R1 SMT.V.V.RISANI FOR R1 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.1124 of 2009 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 11th day of August, 2010 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J Even though apparently attractive grounds have been raised in the memorandum of appeal and Smt.R.Bindu, the learned Government Pleader addressed persuasive arguments based on those grounds, we are of the view that there is no warrant for interference. The court below relied on Ext.A1 which has become final by virtue of judgment of this Court in LAA.1485/09. It is clear to us that Ext.A1 was in respect of much inferior property. The gap between the relevant Section 4 (1) notification and taking over of possession was L. A. A. No.1124 of 2009 -2- not much. According to us, having regard to the finality attained by Ext.A1, enhancement granted under the impugned judgment is justified. The appeal is dismissed in limine. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE C. K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE kns/-