IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI FRIDAY, THE 26TH JUNE 2009 / 5TH ASHADHA 1931 LA.App..No. 680 of 2009(D) -------------------------- LAR.91/2007 of SUB COURT, QUILANDY .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA REP BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) KOYILANDY. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD ROADS DIVISION, KOZHIKODE. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. AMINA HAJUMMA, KANHIROLI THAZHE KUNIYIL, ATHOLI, KOYILANDI TALUK. 2. MUHAMMED NASIF, KANHIROLI THAZHE KUNIYIL ATHOLI, KOYILANDI TALUK. 3. ABU SHIRAD, KANHIROLI THAZHE KUNIYIL, ATHOLI, KOYILANDY TALUK. 4. MEENA MISRI, KANHIROLI THAZHE KUNIYIL, ATHOLI, KOYILANDY TALUK. 5. SMITHA AHAMMED, KANHIROLI THAZHE KUNIYIL,ATHOLI, KOYILANDY TALUK. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- LAA. No. 680 of 2009 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Even though Mr.Basant Balaji, learned senior Govt. Pleader has addressed us very strongly, we are not persuaded to admit this appeal. The case pertains to acquisition of land in Atholi Village for the purpose of construction of bridge and approach road at Kuniyil Kadavu. The relevant section 4(1) notification was published on 27- 2-2004. The land acquisition officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.5,795/- per cent. The reference court under the impugned judgment re-fixed the same at Rs.16,000/-. The parties placed reliance on Ext.A2 and the report and the recommendation of the Advocate Commissioner who inspected the acquired property as well as the property covered under Ext.A2 that both the properties are comparable and that based on Ext.A2 a sum of Rs.28,000/- LAA. N0. 680/09 -2- which is the value revealed in Ext.A2 can be granted. The learned Subordinate Judge rejected the commissioner's report on the reason that the Commissioner has not stated in his report as to whether A2 property was having nearness to any public or private institutions. According to us, there cannot be any challenge against the re-fixation of market value at the instance of the Government. The appeal will stand dismissed. No costs. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) (P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE) ksv/-