IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 13TH MARCH 2009 / 22ND PHALGUNA 1930 LA.App..No. 295 of 2009() ------------------------- LAR.2/2006 of ADDL.SUB COURT,KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT: -------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. BENNY VARGHESE RESPONDENT: --------------- RAJASEKHARAN NAIR THATHYADATH MYALIL, VELLOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: LAA.295/09-U ORDER ON I.A.865 OF 2008 IN F.A.O.295 OF 2009 DISMISSED. SD/- M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE 13.3.2009 OKB - TRUE COPY - P.A. TO JUDGE M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------------------------- L.A.A. No. 295 of 2009 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T An extent of 7.92 Ares in survey No.665/2-2 of Velloor village belonging to the respondent was acquired for Hindustan News Print Limited, Velloor pursuant to section 3(1) notification published on 14.9.1976. Dissatisfied with the land value of Rs.540/- per cent awarded by the Acquisition Officer, respondent claimed enhanced compensation based on the judgment in L.A.R.27 of 1992 dated 14.11.1995. Appellant filed an application for enhancement under section 28(A) of Land Acquisition Act which was referred to Sub Court, Kottayam. Learned Sub Judge, based on Ext.A1 judgment, granted an enhancement of land value at the rate of Rs.900/- per cent instead of Rs.540/- per cent. 2. Contending that the enhancement granted is excessive, State has filed the appeal. Learned Government Pleader was heard. 3. As is clear from the award passed by learned Sub L.A.A.295/09 2 Judge the property involved in L.A.R.27 of 1992 was also acquired for the same purpose and is an adjacent property under the same section 3(1) notification. It is in such circumstances, compensation was enhanced based on Ext.A1 judgment in L.A.R. 2 of 2006. When for similar property acquired under the same 3 (1) notification land value was enhanced by the court, appellant is entitled to get the land value at the same rate. Sub court rightly found that respondent is entitled to get the enhanced compensation as granted in Ext.A1 Judgment. I find no reason to interfere with the judgment. Appeal is dismissed. M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE okb