IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 27TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 5TH ASWINA 1933 LA.App..No. 312 of 2011() ------------------------- LAR.25/2006 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,ATTINGAL .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS IN LAR -------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SPECIAL TAHASILDAR, L.A.(ADDL.UNIT), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.T.T.JOSEPHINA RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS IN LAR ------------------------------- 1. THAJUDEEN, SABHITHA MANZIL, MOOTHALA, PALLICKAL VILLAGE. 2. PATHUMMA BEEVI, W/O.THAJUDEEN, SABHITHA MANZIL, MOOTHALA, PALLICKAL VILLAGE. ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA FOR R1,2 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.No.312 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 27th day of September, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. This appeal by the Government pertains to acquisition of land in Pallickal village for the construction of Pallickal - Puzhakkadavu Bridge pursuant to Section 4 (1) notification published on 5/8/2002. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.7270/- per Are. The same was enhanced to Rs.65,044/- per Are relying on Ext.A3 sale deed executed two years prior to Section 4 (1) notification apart from the oral evidence adduced by the parties. 2. Even though apparently attractive grounds have been raised and Smt.T.T.Josephina learned Government Pleader addressed submissions based on all the grounds, having heard Sri. R.S.Kalkura learned counsel for the respondents and having carefully gone through the impugned award, we are of the view that the findings entered by the learned Subordinate Judge regarding the market value of the property at the relevant time L.A.A.No.312/2011 2 are more or less correct and based on evidence. We do not find any warrant for interference as we also feel that Ext.A3 relied on by the court below was a relevant document. The appeal is dismissed, however without any order as to costs. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE. dpk