IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE FRIDAY, THE 6TH JUNE 2008 / 16TH JYAISHTA 1930 LA.App..No. 551 of 2007() ------------------------- LAR.526/1994 of SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA .................... APPELLANT: RESPONDENT --------------------- STATE OF KERALA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.BASANT BALAJI RESPONDENT: CLAIMANT --------------------- P.K.BAHULEYAN,PRAKASH BHAVAN, PATHIYOOR. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON I.A.NO.1588 OF 2007 IN LAA NO.551 OF 2007 DISMISSED. 6.6.2008 SD/- PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.No.551 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 6th June, 2008 JUDGMENT I am not inclined to admit this appeal which pertains to acquisition in Pathiyoor Village of Mavelikkara Taluk for the construction of Eruva Branch Canal of the PIP. The notification under Section 4(1) was on 15.7.1986 and the lands were wet lands. The awarding officer awarded Rs.741/- per Are. Before the court below the evidence consisted of Ext.A1, copy of the judgment in LAR No.32/91 and the oral evidence of the claimant, A.W.1. The court below was not prepared to place complete reliance on Ext.A1 since the respondent had not taken out any commission for showing the comparability between Ext.A1 property and the acquired property. Nevertheless the court below noticed on the basis of Ext.A1 that in the locality there was a trend of escalation in the land value during the relevant period. The approach of the court below cannot be said to be faulty. Moreover, I find what has been granted is only a nominal increase, i.e., land value has been refixed at Rs.1350/- per Are. The claimant's claim for valuing the wet lands on the basis that the same was potential site was not accepted by the court below by referring to the land utilisation order. At any rate, I do not find any warrant LAA No.551/07 - 2 - for interfering with the judgment under appeal. The appeal will stand dismissed in limine. srd PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE