IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 19TH BHADRA 1931 LA.App..No. 898 of 2008(D) ------------------------------------- LAR.35/2003 of ADDL.SUB COURT, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S): 1ST RESPONDENT IN LAR ----------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REP.BY SPECIAL TAHSILDAR L.A.KANNUR. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.SHYSON P.MANGUZHA RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS & 2ND RESPONDENT IN LAR ----------------------------- 1. KARAYATH PADMANABHAN, S/O.SANKARAN, NEAR YOUTH CENTRE,P.O.MUZHAPPILANGAD, MUZHAPPILANGAD AMSOM, DESOM, KANNUR DISTRICT (DIED). 2. K.SAROJINI, W/O.K.PADMANABHAN, RESIDING AT KARIYATH HOUSE, NEAR YOUTH CONGRESS OFFICE, P.O. MUZHAPPILANGAD. 3. K.DHANESH, S/O.K.SAROJINI, W/O.K.PADMANABHAN, RESIDING AT KARIYATH HOUSE, NEAR YOUTH CONGRESS OFFICE, P.O MUZHAPPILANGAD. 4. K.SREEJITH, S/O.K.SAROJINI, W/O.K.PADMANABHAN, RESIDING AT KARIYATH HOUSE, NEAR YOUTH CONGRESS OFFICE, P.O.MUZHAPPILANGAD. 5. K.SAJITH, S/O.K.SAROJINI, W/O.K.PADMANABHAN,RESIDING AT KARIYATH HOUSE, NEAR YOUTH CONGRESS OFFICE, P.O.MUZHAPPILANGAD. 6. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, ROADS AND BRIDGES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, ERNAKULAM. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = L.A.A. NO. 898 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 10th day of September, 2009. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Subordinate Judge, Thalassery in LAR 35/03. The compensation was awarded on the basis of Ext.A1 which is a certified copy of the award in LAR 27/03. It was contended that an appeal is preferred as LAA 74/08 against the said judgment and so Ext.A1 has not become final and therefore the case has to be entertained. The Registry has noted that the appeal LAA 74/08 is dismissed on 25.5.2009. So by virtue of the said dismissal the judgment Ext.A1 has become final. When it has become final then there is no scope to interfere in this case. Therefore the appeal lacks merit and the same is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-