IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 5TH JUNE 2009 / 15TH JYAISHTA 1931 LA.App..No. 1243 of 2007() -------------------------- LAR.22/1994 of SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT --------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENNY VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT ------------------------------------------------- RADHAMONY AMMA, MADHAVA VILASATHU, KARUVATTA. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = L.A.A.No.1243 of 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 5 th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT An extent of 0.24 Ares of dry land comprised in Survey No.264/31 of Karuvatta village owned by the respondent/defendant was compulsorily acquired by the State for the purpose of Railways. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, was published on 25.09.1991. An award was passed on 15.2.1992. The Land Acquisition Officer had fixed a sum of Rs.4,922/- per Are. On a reference at the instance of the claimant, the Sub Court, Mavelikkara in LAR 22/1994 passed an award enhancing the land value to Rs.11,878/- per Are. The reference court relied on Ext.A1 judgment of the same court in LAR No.346/93 involving the compulsory acquisition of lands from the same village in an earlier notification published on 10.5.1988. In that land acquisition case, the Land Acquisition Officer had fixed the land value at Rs.6,300/- per Are and the Reference Court had enhanced the land value to Rs.14,847/- per Are. In the present L.A.A.No.1243 of 2007 2 case the Reference Court fixed the land value by adopting 80% of the land value fixed in LAR No.346/1993. Aggrieved by Ext.A1 judgment in LAR No.346/93 the State had filed LAA No.145 of 2005 before this Court. The said appeal was dismissed on 16.6.2005. If so, the basis for the enhancement given in the present case stand confirmed. Such being the position I do not find any good reason to interfere with the award passed by the Reference Court. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. Dated this the 5 th day of June, 2009. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj