IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD FEBRUARY 2010 / 14TH MAGHA 1931 LA.App..No. 73 of 2010() ----------------------------------- LAR.183/2003 of SUB COURT, CHERTHALA .................... APPELLANT/L.Rs OF A CLAIMANT: ------------------------------------------------- 1. ANTONY JOSEPH (DIED) NALUKETTIL, KARUVELITHARA, MITHRAKKARY,MUTTAR. 2. CHECHAMMA JOSEPH, W/O.JOSEPH NALUKETTIL, KARUVELITHARA, MITHRAKKARY,MUTTAR. 3. MARIAMMA JOSEPH NALUKETTIL, KARUVELITHARA, MITHRAKKARY,MUTTAR. 4. K.J. ANTONY NALUKETTIL, KARUVELITHARA, MITHRAKKARY,MUTTAR. 5. K.J.MATHEW NALUKETTIL, KARUVELITHARA, MITHRAKKARY,MUTTAR. 6. ALEX K.JOSEPH NALUKETTIL, KARUVELITHARA, MITHRAKKARY,MUTTAR. 7. TEENA JOSEPH NALUKETTIL, KARUVELITHARA, MITHRAKKARY,MUTTAR. REPRESENTED BY THEIR POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SRI.JOSEPH, VAGHATHARA, PALLIPPARAM,CHERTHALA REPRESENTED BY THEIR POWER OF ATTORENEY HOLDER SRI.JOSEPH JOSEPH, PALLIPPURAM,CHERTHALA. BY ADV. MR.A.K.JOHN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS & B. CLAIMANT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL THAHASILDAR (LA) INDUSTRIAL GROWTH CENTRE CHERTHALA. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR K.S.I.D.C, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. BABY GIRIJA, VADAKKECHANIYIL PALLIPPURAM VILLAGE, CHERTHALA TALUK. R1 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.BENNY VARGHESE. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... L.A.A.No.73 OF 2010 ............................................. Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2010. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Land Acquisition Court, Cherthala in LAR.No.183/2003. LAR.No.183/2003 relates to acquisition of 8.90 Ares of dry land, .40 Ares of wet land and .25 Ares of water logged area comprised in Sy.Nos.98/1-1,2-2 of Pallippuram village of Cherthala taluk. The land acquisition officer awarded at the rate of Rs.7,876/= per Are for dry land interior, Rs.988/= per Are for wet land interior and Rs.494/= per Are for water logged area. Aggrieved by the same, a reference has been made. In the reference court the claimants have produced Exts.A1 to A4. The land acquisition court found that the claimants did not adduce any evidence to show that the property covered by those documents are similar and similarly situated in nature and no commission has been taken out for a comparative study of the lands involved in Exts.A1 to A4 as well as in the present case. So, in the absence of evidence to connect Exts.A1 to A4 with the : 2 : L.A.A.No.73 OF 2010 acquired property, the trial court refused to enhance the compensation. 2. The learned counsel for the appellants submits before me that if an opportunity is given, the claimants will be able to establish the same and therefore in the interest of justice, the matter may be remanded. 3. I heard the learned Government Pleader also. It is true that there are some laches on the part of the claimants and they should have been more vigilant in substantiating the contentions before the court below. What ever it may be, interest of justice requires that an opportunity be given to the claimants to establish their case, if they are really entitled to any relief. 4. Therefore the award under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the land acquisition court with liberty to the claimants to take out a commission and adduce evidence in support of their contentions. Needless to say that the Government is also entitled to take its own contentions as well as evidence and thereafter the matter be disposed of in accordance with law. Since the matter is : 3 : L.A.A.No.73 OF 2010 remanded, refund of the full court fee is ordered in favour of the counsel for the appellants. Parties are directed to appear before the land acquisition court on 02.03.2010. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 4 : L.A.A.No.73 OF 2010