IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2009 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1931 LA.App..No. 37 of 2002() ------------------------ LAR.26/1999 of PRL.SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANTS ----------------------- 1. SANTHA MOOKKAN, 2. PAUL MOOKKAN. 3. ANITHA MOOKKAN, ( ALL RESIDING AT MOOKKAN HOUSE NO.1. , FLORICAN HILL ROAD MALAPARAMBA, CALICUT - 9 KOZHIKODE DISTRICT ) BY ADV. SRI.P.K.RAMKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT. -------------------------- THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LAND ACQUISITION, NATIONAL HIGH WAY-II, KOZHIKODE. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.No.37 OF 2002 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 9th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius.C.Kuriakose, J. We have heard Sri.P.K.Ramkumar, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri.Basant Balaji, learned senior Government Pleader. Sri.Ramkumar submitted that the court below did not place reliance on Exts.A1 and A2. Ext.A2 is a court judgment and Ext.A1 is a sale deed. On going through the impugned judgment, we find that the learned Subordinate Judge was justified in not placing reliance on Exts.A1 and A2. As regards Ext.A2 the same was judgment in L.A.R.No.550/1997. It was conceded by Sri.Ramkumar himself that there was appeal by the government against Ext.A2 and this court considering the appeal set aside Ext.A2 and remanded that LAR to the reference court. Sri.Ramkumar submitted that he is not aware as to the nature of the revised judgment passed by the reference court pursuant to that remand order. 2. Whatever that be, the evidence presently available in this case falls short of holding that the appellant is entitled to more than LAA.No.37/02 2 what is granted to him under the impugned judgment. Sri.Ramkumar submitted that if opportunity is given, the appellant will be able to produce relevant evidence which will substantiate his claim for enhancement over what is granted. We are inclined to grant opportunity to the appellant to produce further evidence. But only on condition that for the period during which this appeal was pending before this court i.e. from 7/12/2001 till date, the appellant will not be entitled for statutory interest otherwise admissible under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act on the enhanced compensation to which be may become eligible by virtue of the revised judgment to be passed by the reference court pursuant to this order of remand. The impugned judgment and decree are set aside subject to the above and the LAR is remanded to the Subordinate Judge's Court, Kozhikode. Refund the full court fee paid on the appeal memo to the counsel for the appellant. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. LAA.No.37/02 2