IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2009 / 10TH ASHADHA 1931 LA.App..No. 1523 of 2002 (A) ---------------------------------- LAR.136/1994 of SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA .................... APPELLANT(S): 2ND RESPONDENT ----------------------------------------- THE NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CORPORATION LTD., KAYAMKULAM- REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER (O & M) BY ADV. SRI.V.J.JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT & 1ST RESPONDENT --------------------------------------------------------- 1. SMT. VILASINIKUNJAMMA, AYODHYA, KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA- REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVT. OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, TRIVANDRUM. ADV. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY FOR R1 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BIJOYCHANDRAN THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & P. Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.1523 of 2002 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 1st day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J We do not find any ground to entertain this appeal any longer. This appeal was filed challenging the enhancement of compensation in a Land Acquisition Reference Case pertaining to acquisition of land in Chingoli village for the purpose of NTPC. The relevant Section 4(1) notification was published on 17/04/1990. The property under acquisition was a wetland for which the Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.2,600/- per Are. The Reference Court under the impugned judgment enhanced the land value at the rate of Rs.5,200/- per Are, i.e. cent percent enhancement. It is brought to L. A. A. No.1523 of 2002 -2- our notice that this Court has approved enhancement at this rate in identical cases pursuant to same acquisition. It was the policy decision of the NTPC to withdraw the appeals which they had preferred in cases where enhancement was only cent percent of what was originally awarded. For both these reasons, this appeal will stand dismissed. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE P. Q. BARKATH ALI JUDGE kns/-