IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 28TH AUGUST 2009 / 6TH BHADRA 1931 LA.App..No. 752 of 2009() ------------------------- LAR.247/1999 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, NORTH PARAVUR .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT ---------------------- ANTONY,S/O ESTHAPANCE,POVELLY HOUSE, NAYATHODE KARA,ANGAMALY VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.N.ANILKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. 2. KOCHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT SOCIETY, NEDUMBASSERY,BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SC, KIAS LTD. FOR R2 SMT.T.N.GIRIJA, SC, COCHIN I AIRPORT LT FOR R2 SR.GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI FOR R1 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------ LAA. No. 752 of 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of August, 2009 J U D G M E N T Pius C. Kuriakose, J. The claimant is in appeal being aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the Land Acquisition Reference Court, Paravoor in LAR. No. 247 of 1999. The acquisition was for the purpose of Kochi International Airport Society. The present appeal is confined to the correctness of the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Reference Court for the structures which existed on the property under acquisition. A point of objection is raised by the requisitioning authority. That authority points out that against the very same judgment and decree impugned in this appeal the requisitioning authority had preferred LAA. No. 933 of 2009 impugning the enhancement granted by the reference court on various counts including the value of structures. In that appeal, the appellant herein was present LAA. 752 of 2009 - 2 - and was represented by counsel – the very same counsel who is appearing for the appellant. No memorandum of cross objection was filed by the claimant to that appeal. That appeal was disposed of by this court interfering with the enhancement granted by the reference court in respect of land value, but confirming the enhancement granted in respect of the value of structures. The judgment in that appeal has attained finality. The claimant preferred execution petition for realisation of the amount due under that appellate decree. The entire amount was paid by 15- 10-2008 and the execution court recorded full satisfaction of the decree. The present appeal therefore is not maintainable. The present appeal which is filed years after the disposal of the earlier appeal is not maintainable in law. 2. In view of the above preliminary objection we have heard the senior counsel for the requisitioning authority Sri.N.Sugunapalan and Sri.N.Anilkumar, learned counsel for the appellant on the question of maintainability of the LAA. 752 of 2009 - 3 - present appeal. 3. We are of the view that the issue as to the correctness of the compensation determined by the reference court for the building was an issue in the earlier appeal also and that issue was decided in the earlier appeal by confirming the enhancement granted by the reference court, i.e., by dismissing the requisitioning authority's appeal to the extent it related to the extent of the value of the structures. The present appeal, in our opinion, is clearly not maintainable in law. The appeal is rejected. No costs. Refund the court fee paid on the appeal memo to Sri.Anilkumar, counsel for the appellant. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE ksv/-