Remanded

State of Kerala v. Santha Latha

Kerala HC11 Dec 2007LA.App./155/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside land acquisition judgments regarding the ThiruvananthapuramNeyyattinkara Bye-pass, finding the reference court lacked evidence as the State was absent. The Court remanded matters for fresh consideration with an opportunity for both parties to adduce evidence.

What did the court decide?

Judgments and decrees set aside; matter remanded to reference court for fresh consideration with liberty to adduce fresh evidence; refund of court fee to claimants.

State of Kerala Vs Santha Latha — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2007)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID

¶3

TUESDAY, THE 11TH DECEMBER 2007 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA 1929

¶4

LA.App..No. 155 of 2003() ------------------------LAR.374/1996 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM

¶5

APPELLANT: RESPONDENT:

¶6

¶7

STATE OF KERALA.

¶8

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶9

RESPONDENTS: CLAIMANTS:

¶10

----------------------SANTHA LATHA, S/O. BHAVANI AMMA, SAFALYA, ALTHARA ROAD, VELLAYAMBALAM, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH

¶12

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/12/2007, ALONG WITH LAA NO. 180 OF 2004 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ.

¶14

L.A.A.Nos.155/2003, 1382/2002, 409/2004, 145/2004, 521/2004 and 180/2004

¶15

Dated this the 11^th day of December, 2007

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

Kurian Joseph,J.

¶18

These are appeals filed by the State and the claimants respectively aggrieved by the fixation of land value. The acquisition is for the purpose of ThiruvananthapuramNeyyattinkara Bye-pass. Section 4(1) notification was issued on 31-3-1993. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed land value at the rate of Rs.19,148/- per Are. Following the pattern of fixation of land value in L.A.R.No.373/1996 the reference court refixed the land value at Rs.51,600/- per Are. According to the learned Government Pleader there is absolutely no basis for such a huge enhancement. The reference court found that the State had not produced any evidence before the reference court, not even the basic document was produced. The Land Acquisition Officer also was not examined. The claimants, however, had produced Exts.A1 to A4 documents in L.A.R.No.374/1996, of which Exts.A1 and A2 are sale deeds, Ext.A3 is an agreement for sale and

¶19

L.A.A.No.155/2003 and connected cases.

¶20

. -:2:-

¶21

Ext.A4 is a letter of clearance from the Income-tax Department for sale. AWs 1 to 3 were also examined. An Advocate Commissioner was also deputed. Ext.C1 is the report of the Commissioner and Ext.C1(a) is the plan. The Advocate Commissioner has reported that the property would fetch around Rs.5 lakhs per cent. But it has to be seen that the notification was of the year 1993, whereas the inspection of the Advocate Commissioner was in the year 1999. The learned Government Pleader submits that the Advocate Commissioner has taken note of the developments which have taken place between 1993 and 1999. Be that as it may, since the State did not get an opportunity before the reference court, the learned Government Pleader submits that the State may be given an opportunity before the reference court for producing materials so as to sustain the value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer. Learned counsel for the claimants submits that in which event they may also be given an opportunity to substantiate their claim before the reference court. Having regard to the submissions as above, we are of the view that it is only in the interests of justice that

¶22

L.A.A.No.155/2003 and connected cases.

¶23

. -:3:-

¶24

the parties are given an opportunity as prayed above.

¶25

Accordingly we set aside the judgment and decree in these

¶26

cases and remit the matters to the reference court for fresh consideration. The parties will appear before the reference court on 14-1-2008. The reference shall be answered within another four months. The parties shall be at liberty to adduce fresh evidence.

¶27

In view of the remand as above the claimants appellants shall be entitled to refund of the court fee.

¶28

(KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE)

¶29

(HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE)

¶30

ahg.

¶31

KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ.

¶32

L.A.A.Nos.155/2003, 1382/2002, 409/2004, 145/2004, 521/2004 and 180/2004

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

11^th December, 2007

State of Kerala v. Santha Latha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Kerala v. Santha Latha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rehabilitation Plantation Limited Vs S.Ramakrishna Iyer

State of Kerala Vs D.Dinamoney

State of Kerala Vs G.Balakrishnan

State of Kerala Vs R.Nagammal

State of Kerala Vs M.Shahul Hameed

State of Kerala Vs Beena Menon