Remanded

K.M. Mohammed v. the Executive Engineer

Kerala HC29 Nov 2007LA.App./627/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a land acquisition appeal regarding National Highway widening, the court remanded the issue of unequal structural valuation disparity to the reference court for fresh examination with reference to additional materials. The original judgment on valuation was set aside.

What did the court decide?

L.A.R.No.97/1995 judgment and decree remanded to court below for fresh consideration regarding value of structures.

K.M. Mohammed Vs the Executive Engineer — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2007)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

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

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 29TH NOVEMBER 2007 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA 1929

¶5

LA.App..No. 627 of 2002() ------------------------LAR.97/1995 of SUB COURT, KASARAGOD ....................

¶6

APPELLANT: CLAIMANT A IN LAR 97/1995

¶7

¶8

K.M.MOHAMMED, S/O.ZAINUDDIN ABBAS, P.H.C ROAD, KUMBALA P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.M.A.MANHU ADVOCATE GENERAL

¶10

RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENT IN LAR 97/95

¶11

¶12

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, N.H. DIVISION, KANNUR.

¶13

BY GOVT.PLEADER SHRI K.V.MANOJ

¶14

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/11/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN- UL-RASHID,JJ.

¶16

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

¶17

L.A. A. NO. 627 of 2002-B

¶18

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

¶19

DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2007

¶20

J U D G M E N T

¶21

Kurian Joseph, J.

¶22

This appeal is filed by the appellant in L.A.R.No.97/95 on the file of the Sub Court, Kasargod. The acquisition was for the purpose of widening the National Highway, Kannur. Learned counsel for the claimant submits that the serious grievance is with regard to the valuation of the building. In respect of similarly situated buildings one K.Ramakrishna Acharya and Vittamma Alva, whose structures were acquired for the same purpose by a common award, they are given value of structures at the rate of Rs.200/= per sq.ft. whereas the amount awarded to the petitioner is only Rs.55/= per Sq.ft.

¶23

After having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Govt.Pleader, we are of the view that the additional materials produced by the appellant herein should be examined by the reference court with reference to the other materials and the evidence available on record, since this court will not be in a position to decide what was the justification

¶24

LAA.627/02

¶25

¶26

for the difference in value. Therefore, we set aside the judgment and decree in L.A.R.No.97/95 as far as the value of the structures is concerned and remit the matter to the court below for fresh consideration. It will be open to the parties to adduce fresh evidence. Appellants are entitled to refund of the court fee. The reference will be answered within a period of three months of first appearance. The parties will appear on 07.01.2008.

¶27

KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE

¶28

HARUN-UL- RASHID, JUDGE

¶29

dsn

K.M. Mohammed v. the Executive Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.M. Mohammed v. the Executive Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jyothi Vs M.Ramesan

The President Central Masjid Kalamaserry Vs State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs L.Sivanandan

The Prject Officer,Kwa Vs Parambalath Abdu Rahiman

State of Kerala Vs Thomas

Project Officer Vs Kooramantharayil Ammu