IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2009 / 4TH ASHADHA 1931 LA.App..No. 95 of 2004() ------------------------ LAR.125/1999 of SUB COURT, PAYYANNUR .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT: ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASNAT BALAJI RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT: ------------------------ KUNDIL VEETTIL DEVAKI AMMA, W/O. APPUKKUTTA PODUVAL, RAMANTHALI AMSOM AND DESOM. ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN FOR R1 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.No.95 OF 2004 ------------------------ Dated this the 25th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Even though Sri.Basant Balaji, learned senior Government Pleader has addressed us very strenuously, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and decree. The acquisition was a property in Ramanthali Village for the purpose of construction of approach road to the 2nd Gate of Naval Academy. Relevant section 4(1) notification was published on 30/5/1997. The land acquisition officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.9388/- per Are. The reference court under the impugned judgment enhanced the land value at the rate of Rs.18525/- per Are. The evidence before the reference court consisted of sale document Ext.A1 dated 6/1/1996 and the commissioner's report Ext.A2 and the oral testimony of AW1. On the side of the Government the evidence consisted of Exts.B1 to B3, which were valuation statements kept in the award file. Absolutely no counter oral evidence was adduced on the side of the Government. Ext.A1 property was found by the court to be L.A.A..No.95/2004 2 a comparable property. Ext.A1 revealed centage value of Rs.8000/-. The commissioner reported that the acquired property and Ext.A1 properties compared very favourably. What the learned subordinate Judge did was to fix the land value of the acquired property at Rs. 500/- less than Ext.A1. According to us,what has been done by the learned Subordinate Judge is reasonable. The appeal accordingly will stand dismissed, but no costs. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE dpk