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 8TH APRIL 2009 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1931 LA.App..No. 1801 of 2008() -------------------------- LAR.271/1996 of PRL.SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------ THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) N.H(1), KOZHIKODE. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.K.BABU RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT ----------------------- VELLULI JANU, P.O.ERANHIKKAL, KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM) FOR R1 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.No. 1801 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 8th day of April, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius.C.Kuriakose, J. Sri.R.Bindu Sasthamangalam takes notice on behalf of the respondent/claimant. We have heard the submissions of Sri.P.K.Babu, learned senior Government Pleader and those of Sri.R.Bindu Sasthamangalam. The case pertains to acquisition of land in Elathur village for the construction of Calicut bye-pass pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 05/04/1993. The land acquisition officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs. 4600/- per cent which under the impugned judgment was enhanced to Rs. 18,000/- per cent. In fact in the first instance, the reference court had refixed the land value at Rs. 12,500/- per cent. Being aggrieved, the government came up in appeal and the claimant submitted memorandum of cross objections. During the hearing of that appeal and the cross objection, judgment in L.A.R.No.245/1998 was shown to this court and it was argued that under that judgment, Rs. 18,000/- has been fixed as market value for LAA.No.1801/08 2 identical lands and this court noticed that judgment, and remanded the case to the reference court to have a reconsideration of the issue in the light of the evidence including the judgment in L.A.R.No.245/1998. The said judgment was produced before the reference court as Ext.A3. So also Ext.A4 judgment of this court confirming Ext.A3 was also produced. On going through the impugned judgment, we find that it is on a finding that the acquired property is comparable to Ext.A3, that the learned Subordinate Judge became inclined to refix the market value at Rs. 18,000/- per cent. In view of the irrefutable position that Ext.A3 has attained finality and the obvious position that Ext.A3 property is comparable to the acquired property, we do not find any ground to entertain this appeal. The appeal will stand dismissed. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE sv. LAA.No.1801/08 3