IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH MAY 2008 / 7TH JYAISHTA 1930 LA.App..No. 1697 of 2007(D) --------------------------- LAR.119/2005 of SUB COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT: RESPONDENT --------------------- STATE OF KERALA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.BASANT BALAJI RESPONDENTS: CLAIMANTS/RESPONDENT -------------------------------- 1. ULAHANNAN CHANDY, UMBOOKKATH HOUSE, KINGINIMATTOM, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK (DIED). 2. ANNAMMA, W/O.ULAHANNAN CHANDY, AGED 87, VYALATTAYA, UMBOOKKATH, KINGINIMATTOM KARA, AIKARANAD SOUTH VILLAGE. 3. LEELAMMA, D/O.ULAHANNAN CHANDY, AGED 62 YRS, VYALATTAYA, UMBOOKKATH, KINGINIMATTOM KARA, AIKARANAD SOUTH VILLAGE. 4. ANTHRAYOSE, S/O.ULAHANNAN CHANDY, AGED 58 YRS, VYALATTAYA, UMBOOKKATH, KINGINIMATTOM KARA, AIKARANAD SOUTH VILLAGE. 5. SKARIA, S/O.ULAHANNAN CHANDY, AGED 55 YRS, VYALATTAYA, UMBOOKKATH, KINGINIMATTOM KARA, AIKARANAD SOUTH VILLAGE. 6. MARY @ MARIAMMA, D/O.ULAHANNAN CHANDY, AGED 52 YRS, VYALATTAYA, UMBOOKKATH, KINGINIMATTOM KARA, AIKARANAD SOUTH VILLAGE. 7. VALSAMMA, D/O.ULAHANNAN CHANDY, AGED 49 YRS., VYALATTAYA, UMBOOKKATH, KINGINIMATTOM KARA, AIKARANAD SOUTH VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY FOR R2TO7 SRI.GEORGE KURUVILLA FOR R2TO7 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON I.A.NO.4461 OF 2007 IN LAA NO.1697 OF 2007 DISMISSED 28.5.2008 SD/- PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.No.1697 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 28th May, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree in LAR No.119/05 on the files of the Sub Court, Muvattupuzha. That case was a reference under Section 28A(3) of the Land Acquisition Act and related to acquisition for the construction of High Level Canal, Kolenchery Branch, Block No.XX pursuant to a Section 4(1) notification dated 22.11.1977. The evidence before the reference court consisted of Ext.A1 judgment in LAR No.3/98, another case covered by the very same Section 4(1) notification and acquisition for the very same purpose, apart from Ext.R1 Mahazar and the oral evidence adduced by A.W.1, the 4th claimant (4th respondent). No counter oral evidence was adduced by the Government. The learned Subordinate Judge found that the properties in Ext.A1 and the properties forming subject matter of the reference were covered by the very same notification and rightly relied on Ext.A1. It is conceded by the learned Government Pleader fairly that Ext.A1 has attained finality in the sense that no appeal has been preferred by the Government against Ext.A1. That being the position, due regard is to be given to the legislative objective of Section 28A and it is to be L.A.A.No.1697/07 - 2 - found that there is no infirmity about the impugned judgment. The appeal fails and the same will stand dismissed. srd PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE