IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 15TH MAGHA 1932 LA.App..No. 144 of 2011() ------------------------- LAR.51/2002 of ADDL.SUB COURT,KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT(S): ADDL WND RESPONDENT --------------------------------- INLAND WATERWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, PARAMARA SHOPPING COMPLEX, PARAMARA ROAD, KOCHI - 682018, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, (NOW OFFICE AT HOUSE NO.1/631/1, KANADIKADU AREA MARADU P.O. KOCHI - 682304) BY ADV. SRI.V.SANTHARAM, SC, IWAI RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT AND 1ST RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------ 1. JAMES, THODUVAL VEEDU, KULANGARABHAGOM, CHAVARA, KOLLAM. 2. YESUDAS NETTO, THODUVAL VEEDU, KULANGARA BHAGOM, CHAVARA,KOLLAM. 3. LAISA, THODUVAL VEEDU, KULANGARABHAGOM, CHAVARA, KOLLAM. 4. JESPIN NETTO, THODUVAL VEEDU, KULANGARA BHAGOM, CHAVARA, KOLLAM. 5. JAZEENTATH NETTO, THODUVAL VEEDU, KULANGARABHAGOM, CHAVARA, KOLLAM. 6. JOHN NETTO, THODUVAL VEEDU, KULANGARABHAGOM, CHAVARA, KOLLAM. 7. JAIN NETTO, THODUVAL VEEDU, KULANGARABHAGOM, CHAVARA, KOLLAM. 8. JOSEPH NETTO, THODUVAL VEEDU, KULANGARA BHAGOM, CHAVARA, KOLLAM. 9. JUSTIN NETTO, THODUVAL VEEDU, KULANGARA BHAGOM, CHAVARA, KOLLAM. 10. JEROME NETTO, THODUVAL VEEDU, KULANGARABHAGOM, CHAVARA, KOLLAM. 11. STATE OF KRALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. BY GOVT.PLEADER SMT.T.T.JOSEPHINA THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/02/2011, ALONG WITH L.A.A. NO.145/2011 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.Nos.144 & 145 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 4th day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Both these appeals are preferred by the requisitioning authority – M/s. Inland Waterways Authority of India. The case pertains to acquisition of land in Chavara and Panmana Villages of Kollam District. Under the impugned awards, the enhancement granted is just 60% over what was awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. As this Court has already approved enhancement at the above rate, we are not inclined to entertain these appeals. Both these appeals will stand dismissed in limine. However, we make it clear that in case the claimants/respondents prefer appeals against the impugned judgments, it will be open to the appellant to resist such appeals on the basis of all the grounds including those raised in these appeals. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE dpk