IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2010 / 24TH POUSHA 1931 LA.App..No. 410 of 2009() ------------------------- LAR.299/2005 of PRL.S.C.,THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT / RESPONDENT NO.1. ------------------------------------------ GOVERNMENT OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR. BY ADDL.ADVOCATE GENERAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BABY RESPONDENT(S): APPELLANT/RESPONDENT NO.1. ----------------------------------------- 1. PANOLI ANANDAN, KUNHIPURAYIL HOUSE, P.O. MOORIYAD. 2. PANOLI VASANTHA, KUNHIPURAYIL HOUSE, P.O. MOORIYAD. 3. PANOLI RAMESHAN, KUNHIPURAYIL HOUSE, P.O. MOORIYAD. 4. PANOLI VANAJA, KUNHIPURAYIL HOUSE, P.O. MOORIYAD. 5. PANOLI JANU, KUNHIPURAYIL HOUSE, P.O. MOORIYAD. 6. PANOLI DEVU, KUNHIPURAYIL HOUSE, P.O. MOORIYAD. 7. PANOLI ROHINI, KUNHIPURAYIL HOUSE, P.O. MOORIYAD. 8. PANOLI VIMALA, KUNHIPURAYIL HOUSE, P.O. MOORIYAD. 9. PANOLI VALSAN, KUNHIPURAYIL HOUSE, P.O. MOORIYAD. 10. PANOLI SATHI, KUNHIPURAYIL HOUSE, P.O. MOORIYAD. 11. PANOLI SANTHA, KUNHIPURAYIL HOUSE, P.O. MOORIYAD. 12. PANOLI BHASKARAN, KUNHIPURAYIL HOUSE, P.O. MOORIYAD. 13. THE GENERAL MANAGER, KSIDC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------- L.A.A.No.410 of 2009 ------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of January, 2010. JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Service is complete. There is no appearance for the respondents. Our attention is brought by the learned Government Pleader to the other judgments of this court in respect of acquisition for the same purpose and in the same village. Having regard to the decision taken by this court in those cases, we are of the view that the enhancement ordinarily granted by the learned Subordinate Judge is excessive and that issue ought to be reconsidered by the learned Subordinate Judge. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned judgment and decree and remit back L.A.R. to Sub Court Thalassery. That court is directed to take a fresh decision after affording an opportunity for adducing whatever evidence they want. Compliance will be done by the learned Subordinate Judge within five months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Pius C.Kuriakose, Judge C.K.Abdul Rehim, Judge