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 19TH MAY 2010 / 29TH VAISAKHA 1932 LA.App..No. 575 of 2009() ------------------------- LAR.179/2003 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LATHA T.THANKAPPAN RESPONDENT(S)/CLAIMANTS: --------------- 1. K.VIDHYADHARAN, V.S.NIVAS, VADAKKEVILAKATHU VEEDU, ANAYARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR THIRUVANANTHAPURAM INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.No. 575 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Smt.Latha T.Thankappan, learned senior Government Pleader has placed before us the postal acknowledgment card issued by Advocate Smt. S.S.Laly in response to the registered letter which was sent to her. The appeal need not be treated as defective. It is declared that respondents are duly served. 2. This appeal by the Government pertains to acquisition of land in Pettah village for the purpose of International Airport pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 4/2/1999. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at Rs.1,31,616/- per Are. The Reference Court under the impugned judgment refixed the same at Rs.2,50,000/- per Are. Even though the learned Government Pleader addressed arguments on the basis of the grounds raised in the appeal memorandum, she very fairly brought to our notice that in cases pertaining to other categories acquired for the same purpose, this court has L.A.A.No.575/2009 2 generally approved the enhancement granted by the Reference Curt to 90% above the rate granted by the Land Acquisition Officer. We notice that land involved in this case was included in category 1. The rate of enhancement granted under the impugned judgment is slightly below to 90%. We are of the view that, having regard to the importance of the locality and the correct market value of the property at the relevant time, the rate of enhancement granted under the impugned judgment can be approved. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal, but without any order as to costs. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM , JUDGE dpk