IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 25TH MAY 2009 / 4TH JYAISHTA 1931 LA.App..No. 1098 of 2008(D) --------------------------- (JUDGMENT AND DECREE IN LAR NO.75/98 OF SUB COURT, THALASERY) APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------ SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), THALASSERY. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT ----------------------- PARAKKANDY KRISHNAN, PARAKKANDY HOUSE, NEAR KWA PUMB HOUSE, VAYALAM P.O., THIRUVANGAD. ADV. SRI.JOBY JACOB PULICKEKUDY THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.No.1098 OF 2008 ------------------------ Dated this the 25th day of May, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Sri.Basant Balaji, learned senior Government Pleader, has addressed us very strenuously on the various grounds raised in the appeal. We have very anxiously gone through the impugned judgment. The appeal pertains to acquisition of land in Kodiyeri village, presently within the limits of the Thalassery Municipality, for the purpose of establishment of cancer centre. Relevant Section 4(1) notification was published on 4/6/1997. The land acquisition officer awarded land value at the rate of 3,770/- per cent. The reference court in the first instance granted only 50% enhancement. Aggrieved claimant filed appeal before this court and the matter was remanded. The evidence before the reference court consisted mainly of Exts.A1 to A3. What we find from the impugned judgment is that Exts.A2 and A3 were not relied on, but relying on Ext.A1 the present refixation of the market value at Rs.10,000/- per cent has been done. We find that Ext.A1 is a document executed in L.A.A..No.1098/2008 2 favour of the co-operative society and was rightly found to be a genuine transaction by the reference court. Ext.A1 reveals land value of 36,000/- per cent. The learned Subordinate Judge did not become inclined to grant the same land value reflected in Ext.A1 obviously taking into account the situation that notification was three months prior to Ext.A1. According to us, reduction of Rs. 26,000/- per cent is more or less sufficient to provide for passage of three months time after the notification. Result is that we do not find any warrant at all for interference. The appeal will stand dismissed in limine. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE dpk