IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1931 LA.App..No. 1317 of 2009(D) -------------------------------- LAR.120/2006 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): IST RESPONDENT ------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LATHA T. THANKAPPAN RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT & 2ND RESPONDENT -------------------------------------------------------- 1. RETNAKUMARI, D/O.RAMAKRISHNAN, MANAKKATTU VILAKATHU VEEDU, ATTIPRA. 2. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TECHNOPARK, KARYAVATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SMT.M.HEMALATHA(CAVEATOR) THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/11/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.1317 of 2009 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 4th day of November, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J This is an appeal by the Government and the case pertains to acquisition of land in Attipra village for the purposes of Technopark, Kazhakkoottam. The relevant section 4(1) notification was published on 17/12/2003. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.15623/- per Are. It was enhanced under the impugned judgment by the learned Subordinate Judge to Rs.1,04,400/- per Are. We have heard the submissions of Smt.Latha T. Thankappan, the learned senior Government Pleader and Smt.M.Hemalatha who has lodged a caveat on L. A. A. No.1317 of 2009 -2- behalf of the respondent. Our attention is drawn by Smt.Latha to the judgment of this Court in L.A.A Nos.1332/08, 1954/08, 2478/08 and connected matters. Those cases also pertain to acquisition for the same purpose pursuant to the same notification. Under the judgment in those appeals, we set aside the judgment impugned in those appeals and remanded the matter to the Sub Court for fresh decision. For the various reasons stated in that judgment, the impugned judgment is also liable to be interfered with. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned judgment and remand L.A.R.120/06 to the II Additional Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram. That court is directed to take a fresh decision after affording opportunity to both sides to adduce whatever evidence they want to in support of the rival contentions. The learned Judge will L. A. A. No.1317 of 2009 -3- complete further enquiry and pass revised judgment at the earliest, and at any rate, within four months of the parties entering appearance pursuant to this order of remand. Parties will enter appearance before the Sub Court on 30th November, 2009. It is also directed that this judgment will become operative only if either the appellant or the Requisitioning Authority deposits at least 50% of the decree debt due under the impugned decree within two months from today (if not already paid or deposited). This appeal is thus, allowed by way of remand. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE K. SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE kns/-