Dismissed

The Managing Director,Ksidc,Tvm. v. Kurumpa Parvathy

Kerala HC15 Feb 2008LA.App./1542/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment dismisses Land Acquisition Appeals filed by the requisitioning authority challenging the enhanced land value fixation by the Sub Court, Cherthala, referencing previous consolidation in the Industrial Growth Centre context.

What did the court decide?

Land Acquisition Appeals and buyout land valuation stay applications dismissed with condonation of delay allowed.

The Managing Director,Ksidc,Tvm. Vs Kurumpa Parvathy — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID

¶5

FRIDAY, THE 15TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 26TH MAGHA 1929

¶6

LA.App.No. 1542 of 2007 -----------------------------LAR.146/2003 of SUB COURT, CHERTHALA

¶7

....................

¶8

APPELLANT/2ND RESPONDENT IN LAR:

¶9

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

¶10

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.S.I.D.C., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.D.KRISHNANKUTTY PILLAI SRI.SHEEJO CHACKO

¶12

RESPONDENTS/CLAIMANT 1 TO 4 & 1ST RESPONDENT IN LAR:

¶13

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

¶14

1. KURUMPA PARVATHY, NANADY, PALLIPPURAM.

¶15

2. KRISHNAN, S/O. KUTTAN AND KURUMPA PARVATHY, VADAKKEPURATHUVEETTIL, PALLIPPURAM P.O., CHERTHALA.

¶16

3. NANDINI, D/O. KURUMPA PARVATHY, VADAKKEPURATHUVEETTIL, PALLIPPURAM P.O.,CHERTHALA.

¶17

4. VELAYUDHAN, S/O. KUTTAN AND KURUMPA PARVATHY, VADAKKEPURATHUVEETTIL, PALLIPPURAM P.O., CHERTHALA.

¶18

5. KERALA STATE, REP. BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), INDUSTRIAL GROWTH CENTRE, CHERTHALA.

¶19

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA.

¶20

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/02/2008, ALONG WITH L.A.A. 1543/2007 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ.

¶22

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

¶23

L.A.A. Nos.1542, 1543, 1570 & 1648 OF 2007

¶24

----------------------------------------Dated this the 15^th day of February, 2008.

¶25

J U D G M E N T

¶26

Kurian Joseph, J.

¶27

All the applications for condonation of delay are allowed.

¶28

The requisitioning authority namely, K.S.I.D.C is aggrieved

¶29

by the fixation of land value by the reference court, Sub Court, Cherthala. Acquisition is for the purpose of Industrial Growth Centre at Pallippuram.

¶30

The reference court fixed the land value at the rate of Rs.17,290/- per Are in the place of Rs.7,876/- per Are fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer. Such enhancement has already been upheld by this Court in several cases, covered by the same notification and same purpose and one such set of case is L.A.A.No.1437/2005 and connected cases.

¶31

As far as enhancement of land value in the case of wet land is concerned, it is seen that the Land Acquisition Officer fixed the land value at the rate of Rs.988/- per Are which has

¶32

L.A.A. No.1542/07 & conn. cases 2

¶33

been enhanced upto Rs.2,169/- per Are. It is seen that such enhancement is only proportionate to the enhancement given for the dry land.

¶34

Since this Court has already upheld the fixation of land value by the reference court for the dry land and since refixation of land value in the case of wet land is only proportionate to such enhancement for the dry land, we do not think it necessary to

¶35

interfere with such fixation in the case of wet land also. Thus there is no merit in these appeals and they are accordingly dismissed.

¶36

All the interlocutory applications for stay are dismissed.

¶37

KURIAN JOSEPH JUDGE

¶38

HARUN-UL-RASHID JUDGE

¶39

smp

The Managing Director,Ksidc,Tvm. v. Kurumpa Parvathy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Managing Director,Ksidc,Tvm. v. Kurumpa Parvathy

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

Stae Vs Govindan Pazhukkan

Berthalomeo Auxilian Vs State of Kerala

K.Rajan Vs Land Revenue Commissioner

Yarkose Abraham Vs v.M.Varghese

State of Kerala Vs v.v.Rugmini

Cherian K.George Vs P.Babu