IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE FRIDAY, THE 14TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 23RD KARTHIKA 1930 LA.App..No. 1917 of 2008() -------------------------- LAR.165/1996 of ADDL.SUB COURT,KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT ---------------------- M.D.RAJU, THOPPIL HOUSE, VENGARA, KADAPPA MURI, MYNAGAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.PRATHEESH.P RESPONDENT(S): STATE -------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/11/2008, ALONG WITH NO.1918/2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,J. ------------------------ L.A.A.Nos. 1917 & 1918/2008 ------------------------ Dated this the 14th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT Both these appeals are by the claimants. The acquisitions were for the purpose of railways pursuant to notification under Section 4(1) dated 19/7/1991. The properties were situated in Mynagappally Village of Kollam Taluk. The Land acquisition Officer awarded the land value at the rate of Rs.4956/- per Are. which was enhanced by the court to Rs.8,177/- per Are upon evaluating the evidence adduced by the appellants claimants which consisted of testimony of AW-1 and Exts.A1 to A4. Ext.A1 was the judgment of the same court in L.A.R.136/1994 under which the reference court had refixed the land value for properties similarly treated by the land acquisition officer as the properties involved in this case at Rs.13,692/-. Exts.A2, A3 and A4 were also the judgment of the same court in other cases covered by the very same notification. The learned Subordinate Judge did not become inclined to rely on Exts.A1, A2 or A3 since L.A.A..No.1917/2008 & another 2 according to the learned judge, it is not safe to rely on those documents. 2. In these appeals, the appellant rely on Ext.A1 alone. Under Ext.A1, the land value was refixed At Rs.13,692/-. It is brought to my notice that this court dismissed the appeal filed by the Government against Ext.A1 i.e. judgment in L.A.R. 137/1994. Thus Ext.A1 has attained finality. As already indicated, ext.A1 relates to acquisition pursuant to the very same notification for the same purpose. Ext.A1 properties and acquired properties in this case were treated similar for the purpose of land value by the land acquisition officer. The principles underlying section 28A of the Land acquisition Act cannot be lost sight of. Having regard to the finality attained by Ext.A1 judgment, I am of the view that the appellant is justified in insisting that they should also be paid the land value at the refixed rate of Rs.13,692/- per Are. These appeals will stand allowed to the extent of refixing the land value for the acquired property as Rs.13,692/-. Thus enhancement to be received by the appellants will be at the rate of Rs.8734/- per Are. It is needless L.A.A..No.1917/2008 & another 3 to mention that the appellants will be entitled also for the statutory benefits admissible under Sections 23(2)/ 23 (1A) and also Section 28 of the Land acquisition Act on the enhanced compensation as allowed by this judgment. The parties are however directed to suffer their cost throughout. (PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE) dpk