IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2009 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1930 LA.App..No. 313 of 2009() ------------------------- LAR.155/2001 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,ATTINGAL .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT NO.1 ----------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRVANANTHAPURAM BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.K.BABU RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT & RESPONDENT NO.2 ----------------------------------------- 1. LEKSHMI, KATTIL VEEDU, KALLAMALAKUNNU, CHERUNNIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. 2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, CONSTRUCTION, SOUTHERN RAILWAYS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.No. 313 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius.C.Kuriakose, J. Even though Sri.P.K.Babu, learned senior Government Pleader has addressed strenuous arguments before us, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment. On going through the impugned judgment, we find that the findings entered by the learned Subordinate Judge are founded on evidence which was available on record consisting mainly of Ext.A1 sale document executed 2 ½ years prior to the relevant Section 4(1) notification and Ext. C1 Commissioner's report on the basis of a comparison of the acquired property with property covered by Ext.A1. Ext.A1 was infact a document discussed by the awarding officer in his notes to award. Without assigning any cogent reason, Ext.A1 was not relied on by the land acquisition officer. What the learned Subordinate Judge has done is to notice that Ext.A1 property has certain plus points and to make deduction on the value revealed by Ext.A1 on account of those plus L.A.A.No. 313 OF 2009 2 points. Ultimately, the learned Subordinate Judge would refix the land value originally fixed by the land acquisition officer at Rs. 41,746/- as Rs. 55,575/-. We feel that, it is more or less the correct market value at the relevant time which has been arrived at by the learned Subordinate Judge. The appeal will stand dismissed in limine. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE sv. L.A.A.No. 313 OF 2009 2