IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID FRIDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2011 / 14TH SRAVANA 1933 RP.No. 806 of 2009() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER Dated 11/12/2007 IN LAA.184/2006 IN LAR.238/1998 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): / APPELLANT ---------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, L.A. PWD (SC), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, MR.GEORGE MECHERIL RESPONDENT(S): / RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. VASANTHA KUMARI AMMA, T.C.36/719-20, AMBIKA NIVAS, KEEZHU VEEDU, PALKULANGARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. B.AMBIKA, T.C.36/719-20, AMBIKA NIVAS, KEEZHU VEEDU, PALKULANGARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. V.VIJAYAKUMAR, T.C.36/719-20, AMBIKA NIVAS, KEEZHU VEEDU, PALKULANGARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. V.NIRMALA, T.C.36/719-20, AMBIKA NIVAS, KEEZHU VEEDU, PALKULANGARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. J.SAROJAM, T.C.36/719-20, AMBIKA NIVAS, KEEZHU VEEDU, PALKULANGARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. VASU PRADEEP, T.C.36/719-20, AMBIKA NIVAS, KEEZHU VEEDU, PALKULANGARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R.P.NO.806/2009 7. LALITHA, T.C.36/719-20, AMBIKA NIVAS, KEEZHU VEEDU, PALKULANGARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 8. SUDEEP, T.C.36/719-20, AMBIKA NIVAS, KEEZHU VEEDU, PALKULANGARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 9. NANDINI, T.C.36/719-20, AMBIKA NIVAS, KEEZHU VEEDU, PALKULANGARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. MR.D.SAJEEV THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. .................................................................... R.P.No.806 of 2009 in L.A.A.No.184 of 2006 .................................................................... Dated this the 5th day of August, 2011. O R D E R Ramachandran Nair, J. This Review Petition remains defective for non-service of notice to respondents 6 & 9. However, when the matter came up in the defect list, we considered the Review Petition on merit and heard the learned Government Pleader also. 2. The purpose of the Review Petition is to reduce the enhanced compensation granted by the Sub Court, which was confirmed by this Court through dismissal of appeal on account of delay. However, we notice that the land involved is very valuable land situated in the heart of Thiruvananthapuram city, and further the land involved is only very small extent. We, therefore, do not think there is any serious consequence for the Government on the rate of compensation awarded. Admittedly, by now the land value has gone up several times R.P.No.806/2009 in LAA No.184/2006 2 even from the award amount. So much so, the loser in acquisition is the land owner and not the Government. We, therefore, dismiss the Review Petition as devoid of any merit. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) jg