IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 5TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 16TH MAGHA 1931 LA.App..No.940 of 2009(D) ------------------------------- LAR.353/2005 of PRL.S.C.,THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT NO.2 --------------------------------------- MANAGING DIRECTOR,KSIDC,REP.BY THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER,KSIDC,KESTON ROAD, KOWDIAR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.JOBY CYRIAC, SC, KSIDC RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT AND R1 ----------------------------------------- 1. SHRI.MURIKKOLI BALAN,S/O.GOVINDAN, SUHAS,PAZHASSI,MATTANNUR. 2. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA; REP. BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR,KANNUR. ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE FOR R1 SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/02/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.940 of 2009 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 5th day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J The Requisitioning Authority is in appeal. The acquisition of land was in Kuthuparamba village and the purpose of the acquisition was widening of the road leading to the appellant's Industrial Growth Centre at Valiavelicham. Section 4(1) notification was published on 30/01/01. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.3,899/- per cent which under the impugned judgment was enhanced to Rs.15,000/- per cent. 2. Heard both sides. Our attention is drawn by Sri.Joby Cyriac, the learned counsel for the L. A. A. No.940 of 2009 -2- appellant to the judgment of this Court in K.S.I.D.C v. Vayalambron Krishnan (2008(4) KLT 726). It is noticed that under that judgment which is in respect of the same acquisition, this Court interfered with the judgment of the Reference Court and remanded the LAR case to the court below. For the reasons stated in that judgment, the impugned judgment is liable to be interfered with. Accordingly, we set aside the judgment and decree and remand LAR.353/05 to the Sub Court, Thalassery. The learned Judge will permit all parties to adduce whatever further evidence they want to and pass revised judgment on the basis of the entirety of evidence that comes on record. While taking fresh decision, the court will have L. A. A. No.940 of 2009 -3- due regard to the observations of the judgment in K.S.I.D.C v. Vayalambron Krishnan (2008(4) KLT 726). The appellant will furnish a copy of that judgment also before the learned Subordinate Judge. Parties are directed to enter appearance before the Reference Court on 12/03/2010. Refund the court fee remitted on the appeal memo to the appellant or the counsel. 3. We make it clear that this remand judgment will become operative only if 50% of the decree debt due as per the impugned decree is got deposited by the appellant within two months from today. We also permit the claimant/ respondent to withdraw the amount as and when the deposit is made subject to the final outcome L. A. A. No.940 of 2009 -4- of the LAR case. 4. This appeal is thus allowed by way of remand. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE C. K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE kns/-