AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Balakrishnan, J.—The appellant in L.A.A. No. 843/2006 has filed this Review Petition stating that the learned Subordinate Judge has in another case, L.A.R. No. 104/2003, granted compensation refixing the land value at Rs. 14,586/-per Are. The learned counsel submits that the property covered in that LAR and the property acquired from the appellant in this case are identical and so the claimant in this case is entitled to get the compensation refixed at the rate of Rs. 14,586/- per Are and to that extent, the judgment of this court is to be reviewed.
It is important to note that the judgment sought to be relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner is the judgment passed by the Reference Court in another case. It is not even certain whether that judgment has attained finality. That apart, the subsequent order/judgment rendered by the court in respect of land acquired from another claimant is not a ground to review the judgment in appeal passed by this court. The subsequent decision rendered in another case is not a ground for review. We find this Review Petition is not maintainable and hence the same is rejected.
Refund the full court fee paid on the Review Petition to the appellant.