IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI FRIDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2009 / 16TH SRAVANA 1931 LA.App..No. 616 of 2006(D) -------------------------- LAR.35/2001 of SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA .................... APPELLANT(S): ADDL.2ND RESPONDENT --------------------------------- INLAND WATERWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, PARAMARA SHOPPING COMPLEX, PARAMARA ROAD, KOCHI-682 018, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR. BY ADV. SRI.V.SANTHARAM, SC, IWAI RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT AND IST RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------ 1. SANAL KUMAR, POLACKAL VEETTIL, KARUVATTA VADAKKUM MURI, KARUVATTA VILLAGE, KARTHIKAPPALLY. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SPL.TAHSILDAR (L.A), NATIONAL WATERWAY NO.III, ALAPPUZHA. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI FOR R.2 SMT.A.SALINI LAL FOR R1 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.No.616 OF 2006 ------------------------ Dated this the 7th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. This is an appeal by the requisitioning authority and enhancement of wet lands from Rs. 494/- per Are to 988/- per Are (enhancement of cent percent) is under challenge. Also under challenge is enhancement of value of dry lands from Rs.12,109/- per Are to Rs.18,172.83 per Are i.e. enhancement of 50% over what was awarded by the land acquisition officer. 2. Having gone through the impugned judgment and having heard the submissions of Sri.V.Santharam, learned counsel for the appellant and those of Smt. Shalini Lal learned counsel for the respondent claimant, we are of the view that enhancement granted for dry lands cannot be said to be excessive. We are not inclined to interfere with the above enhancement. In the case of the wet lands, the learned Subordinate Judge has enhanced the value from Rs.494/- to 988/- per Are. We feel that this enhancement is also reasonable and it is more or less L.A.A.No.616/2006 2 the equal to the market value of the acquired land at the relevant time, which is now fixed by the court below. We do not find any warrant for interfering with the enhancement of value given to the wet land also. The appeal will stand dismissed. No costs. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE dpk