IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 22ND FEBRUARY 2011 / 3RD PHALGUNA 1932 LA.App..No. 341 of 2006(A) ------------------------------------ LAR.141/1999 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, NORTH PARAVUR .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT --------------------------------------- ARAVINDAKSHAN, S/O.RAMAN, PULARKATTU VEETTIL, MATTOOR KARA, MATTOOR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.JAICE JACOB RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. SREE SANKARACHARYA SANSKRIT UNIVERSITY, KALADY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. GOVT. PLEADER (SR.) SMT.LATHA T. THANKAPPAN SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN,SC,SANKARACHA.UTY THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- L. A. A. No.341 of 2006 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T Pius C. Kuriakose, J The claimant is in appeal. The acquisition was for the purpose of Sree Sankara University of Sanskrit, Kalady pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 22/04/94. 2. We have heard the counsel for the appellant, Sri.Jaice Jacob and the learned Standing Counsel for the University. Sri.Jaice Jacob draws our attention to the common judgment of this Court in LAA.303/04 and connected matters to which one among us [PCK(J)] is party. Learned counsel submitted that for the reasons stated in that judgment, the impugned judgment is liable to be interfered with and LAR is to be remanded. The learned Standing Counsel for the University submitted that this Court has already confirmed the judgment of the Reference Court where enhancement granted is 45% over what was L. A. A. No.341 of 2006 -2- awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. 3. We have considered the rival submissions. It is true that this Court has dismissed several appeals preferred by the University where enhancement was paid 45% above the rate awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. But by common judgment dated 29/06/09 in LAA.303/04 and connected matters this Court considered various appeals preferred by the claimants who wanted more enhancement than 45% and remanded their cases to the Reference Court for fresh decision. For the various reasons stated in the common judgment the impugned judgment and decree will stand set aside. LAR.141/99 is remanded to the Principal Sub Court, North Paravur. That court is directed to permit both sides to adduce further evidence if they want to. Fresh award will be passed on the basis of the evidence already on record and evidence which comes to be on record further. While taking fresh decision, the court will have due regard L. A. A. No.341 of 2006 -3- to the common judgment in LAA.303/04 and connected cases. The appellant will furnish the court with a copy of the above common judgment. Parties will enter appearance on 07/03/11. We are not inclined to re-fund the full court fee remitted on the appeal memo. Registry will re-fund 80% of the court fee remitted on the appeal memo to the counsel for the appellant. 4. This appeal is thus allowed by way of remand. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) (N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE) kns/-