Dismissed

Stae v. Govindan Pazhukkan

Kerala HC4 Feb 2008LA.App./626/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In LAA appeals, the Kerala High Court rejected the State and GCDA challenges to land valuation for the Maradu Site and Services Scheme. The Court held the fixed value was not excessive, affirmed the reference court's discretion to value unproven title land, and dismissed appeals without remand.

What did the court decide?

The appeals filed by the State and GCDA were dismissed, allowing the land value fixed by the reference court.

Stae Vs Govindan Pazhukkan — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2008)

¶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 MONDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 15TH MAGHA 1929

¶4

LA.App..No. 626 of 2002() ------------------------LAR.76/1996 of III ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM ....................

¶5

APPELLANT: RESPONDENT

¶6

¶7

STATE OF KERALA

¶8

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA

¶9

RESPONDENTS: CLAIMANT

¶10

¶11

GOVINDAN PAZHUKKAN S/O.LATE GOVINDAN PADATHU VEEDU,KUNDANNUR,P.O. MARADU.

¶12

ADDL.R2 IMPLEADED :

¶13

2.GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, KADAVANTHRA, KOCHI-20.

¶14

(IMPLEADED AS ADDL.R2 VIDE ORDER DT. 28.10.2002 IN CMP NO.5845/02)

¶15

BY ADV. SRI.P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON SRI.C.K.ARAVINDAKSHA MENON SRI.A.RAJAGOPALAN SRI.VARGHESE PARAMBIL SRI.PRAKASH P.GEORGE SRI.MURALI.C.

¶16

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ.

¶18

L.A.A. NOS.626/02 & 444/03

¶19

Dated 4^th February, 2008.

¶20

J U D G M E N T

¶21

Kurian Joseph, J.

¶22

These are appeals filed by the State aggrieved by the fixation of land value by the reference court-Sub Court, Ernakulam in LAR Nos.76/96 and 78/96 respectively. The acquisition is for the purpose of Maradu Site and Services Scheme of Greater Cochin Development Authority. Section 4(1) notification is dated 22.10.1993. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the land value at Rs.20,200/- per Are for first category, Rs.10,300/- per Are for second category and Rs.9,500/- per Are for third category. It is seen that this was subject matter of an earlier round litigation leading to the judgment in LAA 680/99, against the relied on judgment in LAR 72/95. After remand also, it is seen that the reference court has sustained the land value. True, in the instant case there is a slight improvement in the land value, which according to the reference court is immaterial and negligible. We do not think that in the facts and circumstances of

¶23

the case, particularly the time lag involved in this case, it will be in the interests of the revenue itself to go for a second remand.

¶24

LAA 626/02 & 444/03

¶25

¶26

The fixation of the land value by the reference court, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the potential for development, cannot be said to be in any way excessive.

¶27

Learned counsel for the Greater Cochin Development Authority (GCDA) submits that the reference court erred in granting land value for 1.12 Ares. It is submitted that the property was in the possession of the GCDA. But, as rightly found by the reference court, the Authority could not prove before the reference court their title. The title, which is not in dispute is that of the claimants and according to the claimants, they were in possession and enjoyment of the property. In view of the fact that the extent is only very small and that the GCDA could not admittedly prove the title, we do not think it necessary to remand the matter for fresh adjudication on that aspect either. There is no merit in the appeals. They are accordingly dismissed.

¶28

KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE.

¶29

HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE.

tgs

LAA 626/02 & 444/03

KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ

¶34

L.A.A. NOS.626/02 & 444/03

¶35

J U D G M E N T Dated 4^th February, 2008.

Stae v. Govindan Pazhukkan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Stae v. Govindan Pazhukkan

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

Berthalomeo Auxilian Vs State of Kerala

K.Rajan Vs Land Revenue Commissioner

K.S.E.B. Vs K.v.Chinnamani

Yarkose Abraham Vs v.M.Varghese

State of Kerala Vs v.v.Rugmini

The Managing Director,Ksidc,Tvm. Vs Kurumpa Parvathy