IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.PADMANABHAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 26TH OCTOBER 2007 / 4TH KARTHIKA 1929 LA.App..No. 499 of 2006(D) -------------------------- LAR.143/1996 of ADDL.SUB COURT,KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT: RESPONDENT. ----------------------- STATE OF KERALA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI BASANT BALAJI RESPONDENTS: CLAIMANTS. ----------------------- 1. IBRAHIMKUTTY, S/O.MEERA SAHIB, SAINAL MANZIL, (VADASSERIKAZHAKKATHIL), KILIKOLLOOR CHERRY. 2. RASHEELA BEEVI, D/O.UMAIBA BEEVI, SAINAL MANZIL, (VADASSERIKAZHAKKATHIL), KILIKOLLOOR CHERRY. 3. RAHIYANATHU BEEVI, POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER OF IBRAHIMKUTTY. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/10/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. PADMANABHAN NAIR ,J. ------------------------------------------------- L.A.A.No.499 of 2006 ------------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 26th day of October, 2007 JUDGMENT The State has filed this appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Sub Judge, Kollam to the respondents. Land Acquisition Officer awarded an amount of Rs.15,380/- per are. That was enhanced to Rs.22,230/- by the court below, that is to say about 42% increase. This appeal arose from L.A.R.No.143/1996. That case was tried along with L.A.R.Nos.83/1996, 94/1996, 142/1996, 194/1996 and 114/1997. It is seen that no appeals were filed against other judgments and decrees and hence those judgments and decrees have become final and conclusive. So I do not find any reason to admit and keep this appeal pending. I also found that enhancement is reasonable. No merit in the appeal. It is only to be dismissed. In the result, appeal is dismissed. I.A.No.2051/2006 will stand dismissed. K. PADMANABHAN NAIR, JUDGE. cks