IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2009 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1931 LA.App..No. 819 of 2007(D) -------------------------- LAR.146/2003 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,PARAVUR .................... APPELLANT(S): 2ND RESPONDENT ---------------------------- KOCHI REFINERIES LTD., (NOW M/S.BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.), MARADU PO, KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS DY.GENERAL MANAGER (E&C). BY ADV. SRI.A.M.SHAFFIQUE, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT & 1ST RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------- 1. MANI VARGHESE, EDAPALAYIL, KUZHIKKAD. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.T.P.MURALEEDHARAN FOR R1 SRI.S.SHYAM FOR R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.K.BABU THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.No.819 OF 2007 ------------------------ Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Even though the learned counsel for the appellant has addressed us very strenuously on the basis of the grounds raised in the memorandum of appeal, having gone through the judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge, we do not find any warrant for interfering with the same. We find that Ext.A1 was rightly relied on by the learned Sub Judge and that to the oral evidence given by the claimant as AW1, no counter oral evidence was given by the respondent or by the requisitioning authority, the appellant. According to us, it is more or less the correct market value of the property at the relevant time which has been arrived at by the learned Sub Judge. Moreover, it is seen that what has been granted by way of enhancement is only 35% of the rate awarded by the land acquisition officer. Since we are dismissing this appeal taking into account the smallness of the stakes involved in the appeal, it is made clear that this judgment will not be quoted as a precedent for any L.A.A.No.819/2007 2 other land acquisition cases. For all the above reasons, this appeal will stand dismissed in limine. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE dpk