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. 507 of 2004() ------------------------- LAR.59/1996 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT: ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA. REP.BY THE SPL. TAHSILDAR ADDL. L.A. UNIT VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.K.BABU RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS: ------------------------- 1. P.SUDHADEVI, T.C.13/1759 (1), SREERAM VEEDU, MURINJAPALAM, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., TRIVANDRUM. 2. REMANI MADHAVAN OF -DO- -DO-. 3. RAJEEV MADHAVAN OF -DO- -DO-. 4. REGUL MADHAVAN OF -DO- -DO-. 5. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. ADV. SRI.SUBHASH CYRIAC FOR R1 TO 4 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/03/2009 ALONG WITH LAA.NO.210/09, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.Nos. 507/2004 & 210/2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius.C.Kuriakose, J. L.A.A.No.21/09 is the appeal preferred by the Government impugning the award of the reference court in respect of acquisition in Manacaud village for the construction of vegetable market-cum- shopping complex as per Section 4(1) notification published on 18/01/1993. The land acquisition officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs. 30,369/- per Are which was enhanced by the reference court to Rs. 1,18,560/- per Are. The principal item of evidence which was relied on by the reference court in this case was Ext.A1 judgment in L.A.R.No.59/1996. Having gone through the impugned judgment, we feel that the learned Subordinate Judge was justified in placing reliance on Ext.A1 for granting enhancement to the claimant. 2. L.A.A.No.507/04 is the appeal preferred by the government against the judgment which is referred to as Ext.A1 in L.A.A.No.210/09. It is seen from the judgment impugned in LAA.No.507/04 & 210/09 2 L.A.A.No.507/04 that the learned Subordinate Judge relied on the common judgment in L.A.R.Nos. 188/96, 194/96, 197/96 and 198/96. This acquisition was also for the same purpose and the relevant Section 4(1) notification was published on the same day. 3. We are informed that three land acquisition appeals were preferred against cases covered by Ext.A1 common judgment as L.A.A.No.423/2002, 1050/2001 and 1630/2001. Learned government pleader submits that those three appeals were dismissed confirming the common judgment impugned therein. Under the above circumstances, we are of the view that no useful purpose will be served from the Government's point of view by admitting these appeals. We dismiss these appeals in limine. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE sv. LAA.No.507/04 & 210/09 2