High Court Kerala High Court

State Of Kerala vs Aveekara Dinesan on 15 October, 2008

Kerala High Court
State Of Kerala vs Aveekara Dinesan on 15 October, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

LA.App..No. 1883 of 2008()


1. STATE OF KERALA, BY THE SPECIAL
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. AVEEKARA DINESAN, KRISHNALAYAM,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

 Dated :15/10/2008

 O R D E R
                        PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J.
               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                         L.A.A.No.1883 of 2008
               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                       Dated: 15th October, 2008

                                JUDGMENT

This appeal by the Government pertains to acquisition of land in

Nellikode Village in Kozhikode District for the purpose of widening of

Pottammal-Manathalathazham road pursuant to a notification under

Section 4(1) dated 24.12.1993. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded

land value at the rate of Rs.13446/- per cent which was enhanced by

the reference court to Rs.30,000/- per cent. It was mainly relying on

Exts.A1 and A2 and the Commissioner’s report Ext.C1 that the

learned Subordinate Judge granted such enhancement. Ext.A1 was

the appellate judgment pertaining to LAR No.280/94 and Ext.A2 was

the judgment pertaining to LAR No.119/98. It was noticed that

Exts.A1 and A2 were in respect of acquisition for the same village

pursuant to another notification under Section 4(1) which was slightly

earlier to the relevant Section 4(1) notification in this case. The

comparability of Exts.A1 and A2 properties with the acquired

properties in this case was reported by the Commissioner. Even after

remand, the Government did not adduce any counter evidence.

Having gone through the judgment, I am of the view that the learned

Subordinate Judge was justified in relying on Exts.A1 and A2 which

LAA No.1883/08 – 2 –

had become final. In view of the finality attained by Exts.A1 and A2,

there is no warrant for interference. The appeal fails and the same

will stand dismissed.

srd                               PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE