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 24TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1931 LA.App..No. 880 of 2006() ------------------------- LAR.71/1998 of SUB COURT, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT(S): SUPPL.2ND RESPONDENT --------------------------------------------- AIRPORT DIRECTOR, AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, NATIONAL AIRPORTS DIVISION, CALICUT AIRPORT, CALICUT AIRPORT P.O. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.S.SUJIN RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT & IST RESPONDENT IN LAR --------------------------------------------------------------- 1.MOONALUNGAL SAINABA D/O MOHAMMED PO. MELANGADI, KONDOTTY. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, MALAPPURAM. GOVT. PLEADER SMT.LATHA T.THANKAPPAN FOR R2 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ----------------------------------------------------------- LAA. No. 880 of 2006 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T Pius C. Kuriakose, J. The requisitioning authority, the Airport Director, Calicut Airport is the appellant. The property under acquisition was in Nediyirippu Village and was acquired for the purpose of expansion of the runway of Calicut Airport pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 15-11- 1993. The land acquisition officer included the property in Tak No. 5 and awarded land value at the rate of Rs.6225/- per cent. The reference court under the impugned judgment would re-fix the land value at Rs.11,500/- per cent. We notice our common judgment in LAA. No. 1020 of 2004 and connected cases. Under that judgment we refixed the value of land included in various Taks acquired for the same purpose. Following the decision taken under that common judgment we refix the value of the land acquired in LAA. No. 880 of 2006 - 2 - the present case at Rs.10,250/- per cent. Appeal stands allowed to the above extent only. It is made clear that on the total enhanced compensation to which the respondent/claimant becomes eligible by virtue of this judgment, he will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Section 23(1A), 23(2) and Section 28 of the L.A. Act. The parties are directed to suffer their costs. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE ksv/-