IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 13TH JANUARY 2011 / 23RD POUSHA 1932 LA.App..No. 933 of 2008 (C) -------------------------------- LAR.128/2003 of ADDL.SUB COURT,KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT: ----------------------- AHAMMADKUTTY, S/O.KOCHO, MURINJAKADAVIL, ADIYAM MURIYIL, VADAYAL VILLAGE, VAIKOM. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW PHILIP EDAPPALLIL RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. GOVT. PLEADER SMT.T.T.JOSEPHINA THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/01/2011, A/W LAA.1727/07, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & N. K. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. Nos.933 of 2008 & 1727 of 2007 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J These two appeals are preferred by the claimant. They challenge the award of the Land Acquisition Reference Court on the ground that the compensation re-determined by that court is inadequate. The acquisition was of property in Vadayar village and Kulashekaramangalam village pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 30/07/1999. The purpose was for the construction of approach road to Palamkadavu bridge. We notice the judgment of this Court in LAA.253/06 to which one among us [PCK(J)] is party. It is seen that under that judgment, this Court has interfered with the identical judgment passed by the very same Land Acquisition Reference Court and remanded the LAR to the court below for fresh decision. For the various reasons stated L. A. A. No.933 of 2007 & con. cases -2- in LAA.253/06, the judgments which are impugned in these appeals are also liable to be interfered with. Hence, we set aside the impugned judgment and decrees and remand LARs.128/03 and 136/03 to the Subordinate Judge's Court, Kottayam for fresh decision. We direct the learned Subordinate Judge to permit both sides to adduce further evidence if they are desirous of. That court will pass revised judgment taking into account the evidence already on record and the further evidence which will be adduced by the parties. The parties will enter appearance on 29/01/11. Considering the special circumstances attending on these appeals, Registry will refund only 80% of the court fee remitted on the appeal memorandum to the counsel for the appellants. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE N. K. BALAKRISHNAN JUDGE kns/- L. A. A. No.933 of 2007 & con. cases -3-