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 29TH MAY 2009 / 8TH JYAISHTA 1931 LA.App..No. 1185 of 2007() -------------------------- ( LAR.NO.134/98 OF SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT: ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.K.BABU RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS & ADDL.RESPONDENT NO.2: ------------------------------------------------ 1. P. LEELA, PANACHAMOOTTU VEEDU, THEKKUMBHAGAM MURI, KAZHAKKOOTTAM. 2. ELECTRONIC TECHNOLOGY PARKS (KERALA), KARIAVATTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER SRI.K.G.SATHEESH KUMAR ADV. SRI.K.P.SUJESH KUMAR FOR R1 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.No. 1185 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of May, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius.C.Kuriakose, J. This appeal preferred by the government pertains to acquisition of land for the purpose of Electronics Techno Park at Kazhakoottom pursuant to a notification under Section 4(1) dated 5-4-94. The land acquisition officer included this property in category 11 ( fertile dry land having long frontage of a lorry going road) and awarded land value at the rate of Rs. 11380/- per Are. Under the impugned judgment, the learned Subordinate Judge on evaluating the evidence which came on record consisting of Ext.A1 and testimony of AW1 on the side of the claimant alone, would apply rule of thumb and grant an enhancement of 30% and refix the land value at Rs. 14794/- per Are. It is brought to our notice that certain claimants have preferred appeal being dis-satisfied by the rate of enhancement granted by the court. But in this appeal preferred by the government, our concern is whether the impugned judgment warrants interference. According to us, there LAA.No.1185/07 2 is no warrant for interfering with the impugned judgment at all since the enhancement granted cannot be by any standards said to be unreasonable. The appeal will stand dismissed in limine. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI JUDGE sv. LAA.No.1185/07 2