IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2009 / 28TH JYAISHTA 1931 LA.App..No. 1819 of 2008(D) --------------------------- LAR.285/1991 of SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT: ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ADDL.GOVT.PLEADER, MAVELIKKARA. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.K.BABU RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT: ------------------------ JAMALUDEEN RAWTHER, VELIYIL VEEDU, PEROORKARANMA, THAMARAKULAM. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.No.1819 OF 2008 ------------------------ Dated this the 18th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Even though Sri.P.K.Babu, learned senior Government Pleader has addressed us very strenuously, we do not find any reason for interfering with the impugned judgment. The acquisition was of property in Thamarakkulam Village near Mavelikkara. Relevant Section 4(1) notification was published on 16/5/1990. The land acquisition officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.4386/- pr Are. The reference court refixed the land value at Rs.20,000/- per Are. The evidence mainly relied on by the claimant consisted of Exts.A2, A3, A4 & A5 judgments of the same court. Though it is not clear whether Exts.A2 and A3 have attained finality, we need not worried about that aspect since it is seen that learned subordinate Judge placed reliance not on Exts.A2 and A3, but on Exts.A4 and A5. The learned Subordinate Judge himself has ensured before relying on Exts.A4 and A5 that those judgments had attained finality. Having gone through the impugned judgment, we feel that L.A.A..No.1819/208 2 reliance placed by the court below on Exts.A4 and A5 was quite justified. Moreover, it is seen that there was absolutely no counter evidence on the side of the Government to the evidence adduced by the claimant. For both these reasons this appeal will stand dismissed. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE dpk