IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 8TH ASWINA 1931 LA.App..No. 114 of 2006(C) -------------------------------- LAR.128/2000 of PRL.SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, L.A., KOZHIKODE. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD BRIDGES DIVISION, KOZHIKODE. BY SRI.RAJAN JOSEPH, ADDL.A.G. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT: --------------------------------- GOPIDASAN, S/O. ACHUTHAN, PUTHUKULANGARA HOUSE, OLAVANNA, KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.THOMAS ANTONY THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.114 of 2006 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 30th day of September, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J We are not inclined to entertain this appeal which pertains to acquisition of land pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 25/10/1995 for the purpose of construction of bridge at Odumbrakadavu near Kallayi within the area of Kozhikode Corporation. The Land acquisition officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.7056/- per cent treating the land as garden lands. The Reference Court under the impugned judgment found that on the basis of basis document itself that the market value to be awarded was more than Rs.11,000/-. Relying on evidence adduced by the L. A. A. No.114 of 2006 -2- claimant which consisted of Exts.A1 to A9; documentary evidence Exts.X1 to X4 and PW1 and PW2, the learned Subordinate Judge would re-fix the value at Rs.20,000/- per cent. The impugned judgment is a common judgment pertaining to as many as 17 L.A.R cases. It is brought to our notice that the Government did not prefer any appeal against the judgments relating to nine of those cases. It is seen from the records that the extent involved in these cases were more or less the same. Therefore, we are of the view that the circumstances that the Government did not prefer appeals against the case is of great importance. 2. Having gone through the impugned judgment, we feel that the findings entered therein regarding the market value are founded on evidence which were L. A. A. No.114 of 2006 -3- actually available on records. The appeal will stand dismissed. No costs. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE K. SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE kns/-