Remanded

State of Kerala v. Valsa

Kerala HC1 Nov 2007LA.App./566/2001

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a land acquisition appeal, the Court held that while a 60% enhancement is not excessive per precedent, the matter is remanded to the Reference Court to examine site similarity with another case allowing 95% enhancement. Interest is denied if enhancement exceeds 60% due to applicant's failure to prove comparability.

What did the court decide?

L.A.R. 144/97 set aside and remanded to Reference Court to examine similarity with LAR 253/1997; cross-objection disposed with instruction on interest.

State of Kerala Vs Valsa — 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

THURSDAY, THE 1ST NOVEMBER 2007 / 10TH KARTHIKA 1929

¶4

LA.App..No. 566 of 2001(B)

¶5

------------------------LAR.144/1997 of ADDL.SUB COURT, NORTH PARAVUR

¶6

APPELLANT: RESPONDENT

¶7

¶8

STATE OF KERALA

¶9

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI K.V.MANOJKUMAR

ADVOCATE GENERAL

RESPONDENT:CLAIMANT

VALSA, D/O. RAMACHANDRAN, CHERIA CHANASSERY, PERUMPADANNA. (DIED)

¶14

ADDL.RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 ARE IMPLEADED AS THE LEGAL HEIRS OF THE DECEASED RESPONDENT AS PER ORDER DT. 18.12.2007 ON I.A. 4785/07.

¶15

ADDL.R2. K.G.RAJESH, S/O. K.K.GOVINDANKUTTY, KUNNATHULLY HOUSE,

¶16

PERUMPADANNA JUNCTION, NORTH PARAVUR P.O.

¶17

ADDL.R3. K.G.DINESH, S/O. K.K.GOVINDANKUTTY, KUNNATHULLY HOUSE,

¶18

PERUMPADANNA JUNCTION, NORTH PARAVUR P.O.

¶19

BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN SRI.S.SUJIN

¶20

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/11/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

I.A.No.74 of 2005 in L.A.A. 566 OF 2001-B

¶22

DISMISSED.

¶23

1.11.2007.

¶24

ID/- KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. ID/- HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE.

¶25

KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ.

¶26

------------------------------------------------------------------

¶27

L.A.A. 566 of 2001 & Cross-objection 56/2005

¶28

Dated: November 1, 2007

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

Kurian Joseph, J.

¶31

Both the acquisitioning authority and the claimant are aggrieved by the fixation of land value by the Sub Court, North Paravur in LAR 144/1997. The acquisition is for NH-17 of North Paravur. The Reference Court fixed the land value at 60% over and above the value awarded by the land acquisition officer. In view of the judgment of this court in LAA No.1531/2000, such fixation cannot be held to be excessive. The relied on judgment also has become final. Therefore LAA 566/2001 filed by the State is dismissed.

¶32

As far as the cross-objection is concerned, the contention is that the acquired property is similar and similarly situated as in LAR 253/1997 wherein the Reference Court has granted enhancement at the rate of 95%. The land value fixed in LAR 253/1997 has become final in view of the judgment in LAA 52/2001. There is no evidence available before court as to whether the acquired property and the property in LAR 253/97 are similar and similarly situated. True, the judgment is produced before this court. Unless the same is available before the Reference Court, the comparability and similarity cannot be looked into.

¶33

The learned Government Pleader submits that in case this court remits the matter to the Reference Court, the State may not be burdened with the liability to pay interest at the rate of 15% for the period covered by the pendency of the cross-objection, in the event of the Reference Court granting enhancement. We find justification in the submission since the best available evidence was not produced by the claimant before the Reference Court.

¶34

L.A.A. 566 of 2001

¶35

& Cross-objection 56/2005 Page numbers

¶36

As we feel that the interests of justice require that a further chance is given to the claimant, we set aside the judgment and decree in LAR 144/97 on the file of the Sub Court, North Paravur and remit the same to the Reference Court with a direction to look into the similarity and comparability of the acquired property with that of the property covered by LAR 253/1997. The parties shall appear before the Reference Court on 3.12.2007. Thereafter the Reference Court shall dispose of the reference within another two months. It is made clear that in the event of the Reference Court granting any enhancement to the claimant in excess of 60% already granted, the Reference Court shall make it clear in the decree that the claimant shall not be entitled to interest at the rate of 15% from the date of filing of the cross-objection viz. 22.3.2005 to 1.11.2007.

¶37

In view of the remand as above, the cross-objector shall be entitled to refund of court fee.

¶38

KURIAN JOSEPH

¶39

HARUN-UL-RASHID JUDGE.

¶40

mt/-

¶41

L.A.A. 566 of 2001 & Cross-objection 56/2005 Page numbers

¶42

KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ.

¶43

L.A.A. 566 of 2001 &

¶44

Cross-objection 56/2005

¶45

JUDGMENT

¶46

¶47

1.11.2007

State of Kerala v. Valsa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Kerala v. Valsa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pankajakshy Vs State of Kerala

Kochi International Airport Society Vs Ouseph

State of Kerala Vs Kathri

M.B.Kalavathy Vs State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs Renjith

State Vs Gourikutty Amma