IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH AUGUST 2008 / 15TH SRAVANA 1930 LA.App..No. 391 of 2008() ------------------------- LAR.222/1996 of ADDL.SUB COURT,KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT: APPLICANT -------------------- STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,KOLLAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. ARJUNAN ACHARY,VILAYIL VEEDU MYNAGAPPALLY. 2. PONNAMMA LEELAMMAL,VILAYI VEEDU MYNAGAPPALLY. 3. GANAPATHY ACHARY, GOPALAKRISHNA ACHARY VALIYAVILAPUTHEN VEEDU, KADAPPA, MYNAGAPPALLY. 4. SAROJINI AMMAL, VALIYAVILAPUTHEN VEEDU KADAPPA, MYNAGAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.JOHN BRITTO FOR R3,4 SRI.C.A.RAJEEV FOR R3,4 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.No.391 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 6th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal by the Government pertains to the acquisition of 1.03 Ares of land in Mynagappally village for the purpose of railways pursuant to a notification under section 4 (1). The land acquisition officer fixed the land value at the rate of Rs. 4,956/- per Are. The court relying on Ext.A1 judgment, re-fixed the land value at the rate of Rs. 14,752/- per Are. On going through the judgment, it is seen that Ext.A1 case also pertains to acquisition for the very same purpose pursuant to the very same notification and in the very same village. Thus, undoubtedly, Ext.A1 had considerable probative value and relevance in deciding the present reference case. The question is whether Ext.A1 has attained finality. It is stated in the appeal memorandum that against Ext.A1, L.A.A.No.52/2004 is pending. Registry reports that L.A.A.No.52/04 was disposed of by the Division Bench on 3-10-2007. A copy of the judgment in LAA.NO.391/08 2 L.A.A.No.1122/02 is available. The judgment reveals that Ext.A1 has been approved by the Division Bench. The result is therefore that this appeal will stand dismissed. No costs. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv. LAA.NO.391/08 2