IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2011 / 18TH JYAISHTA 1933 LA.App..No. 37 of 2009(D) ------------------------------------- LAR.264/2000 OF ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LA, FOR AIRPORT KANNUR AT MATTANNUR. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.LATHA T.THANKAPPAN. RESPONDENTS/CLAIMANTS: ----------------------------------------- 1. AZHIKKODAN CHERIYATH NARAYANI AMMA, KEEZHALLUR AMSOM DESOM, P.O. KEEZHALLUR. (DIED) 2. KUNHI RAMAN NAMBIAR, KEEZHALLUR AMSOM DESOM, P.O. KEEZHALLUR. 3. NALINI AMMA, KEEZHALLUR AMSOM DESOM, P.O. KEEZHALLUR. 4. KARUNAKARAN NAMBIAR, KEEZHALLUR AMSOM DESOM, P.O. KEEZHALLUR. R3 & R4 BY ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- L.A.A.No.37 of 2009 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of June, 2011 Judgment Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The appeal is remaining defective for the reason that the 1st respondent is reported dead and notice to the 2nd respondent is returned for the reason that the address is insufficient. We notice from the impugned judgment that respondent Nos.1 to 4 were co-claimants before the reference court and they appeared through the same counsel. It also appears to us that they belong to the same family. In all probability, respondent Nos.2 to 4 are the legal heirs of the first respondent. According to us, the interest of the other respondents in the subject matter of the appeal is adequately represented by respondents 3 and 4 who have entered appearance. The appeal need not be treated as defective. Service is declared complete. 2. There is no appearance for the respondents. We have heard the submissions of Smt.Latha T.Thankappan, learned Senior Government Pleader. She draws our attention to the LAA 37/09 2 judgment LAA No.1121 of 2010. Relying on the above judgment, we refix the compensation in this case at Rs.2500/- per cent. The claimants will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Sections 23(2), 23(1A) and under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act. The appeal is allowed as above. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. srd LAA 37/09 3 LAA 37/09 4