IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
LA.App..No. 842 of 2005()
1. THE CHIEF MANAGER (HR),
... Petitioner
Vs
1. REPHEEGA BEEVI, KOTTOLI HOUSE,
... Respondent
2. SHAJI RASHEED, OF DO.
3. SHAJEELA OF DO.
4. SHAJIL RASHEED OF DO.
5. SHAJITH RASHEED OF DO.
6. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
For Petitioner :SRI.K.ANAND (A.201)
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN
Dated :17/08/2009
O R D E R
PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
L.A.A. No. 842 of 2005
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dated this the 17th day of August, 2009
JUDGMENT
PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J.
The Registry reports that service of notice on respondents 2, 4 and 5
is returned unserved, that notice on 5th respondent returned unclaimed and
that the service not complete. On going through the judgment, it is seen that
the party respondents are members of the same family and were appearing
through the same Advocate. There is no conflict of interest between them.
Therefore interest of the parties yet to be served is represented adequately
by the parties who have been served. We are therefore of the opinion that
the appeal can be considered on merits.
2. This is an appeal by the requestioning authority. The Land
Acquisition Officer awarded land value at Rs.735/- per Are. The reference
court re-fixed the land value at Rs.9,050/- per Are. Having heard the
submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned
Government Pleader. In this case where the claimants/respondents have not
entered appearance, we feel that the enhancement granted by the reference
court is on the higher side. On re-appreciation of the evidence, we are of the
L.A.A.No 842/05 2
view that the market value could have been fixed correctly at Rs.2,205/- per
Are.
Accordingly, we set aside the judgment and decree and re-fix the
land value at Rs.2,205/- per Are. The appeal stands allowed but without any
order as to costs. The claimants will be entitled to all statutory benefits
admissible in law on the total enhanced compensation to which they are
entitled by virtue of this judgment.
PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE.
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE.
mn.