IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE THURSDAY, THE 3RD JULY 2008 / 12TH ASHADHA 1930 LA.App..No. 313 of 2008() ------------------------- LAR.102/1999 of SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA .................... APPELLANT: RESPONDENT NO.1 --------------------- STATE OF KERALA ,REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR.LA.NO.III,S.T.P.S.HARIPAD) BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.BASANT BALAJI RESPONDENTS/CLAIMANT & 2ND RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------------------------- 1. RADHAKUMARI, KOCHUMADATHIL, MUTTOM CHEPPAD. 2. N.T.P.C. LIMITED. BY ADV. SRI.B.RENJITHKUMAR FOR R1 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON IA NO.757 OF 2008 IN LAA NO.313 OF 2008 DISMISSED. 3.7.2008 SD/- PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L.A.A.No.313 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 3rd July, 2008 JUDGMENT In this appeal pertaining to acquisition of 0.80 Ares of dry land in Cheppad Village for the purposes of NTPC pursuant to a Section 4 (1) notification dated 17.6.1986. The land acquisition officer had awarded land value at the rate of Rs.7972/- per Are. The reference court relying mainly on the judgment of the same court in LAR No.555/93 revised the land value to Rs.25,000/- per Are. In doing so, the learned Subordinate Judge has found that the acquired property was superior in quality to the acquired properties in Ext.A1. That finding in my opinion was justified. It was noticed by the learned Subordinate Judge that Ext.A1 judgment was pursuant to a Section 4 (1) notification which was three years subsequent to Section 4(1) notification in this case. Thus, perhaps the learned Subordinate Judge could have made a slight reduction from the amount of Rs.25,000/- for considering time lag between these notifications. At the same time, having gone through the judgment I feel that the learned Subordinate Judge had kept in mind all the relevant considerations for valuing properties which are acquired under the Land Acquisition Act. More over it is seen that the stakes involved in this appeal is LAA No.313/08 - 2 - less than Rs.15,000/-. I am given to understand by the Registry that Ext.A1 has attained finality in the sense that this court by judgment in LAA No.242/02 and connected case confirmed Ext.A1. For all these reasons, this appeal will stand dismissed in limine. srd PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE