Allowed

Madhusoodhanan and Another v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Mar 2011LA.App./175/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court allowed a Land Acquisition Appeal by re-fixing the market value of the appellants' land at Rs. 28,990 per Are. The court relied on a previous final judgment regarding inferior category land to justify a higher valuation and awarded statutory benefits excluding costs.

What did the court decide?

Re-fixation of land value at Rs. 28,990/- per Are and entitlement to statutory benefits under Sections 23(2), 23(1A), and 28.

Madhusoodhanan and Another Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 14TH MARCH 2011 / 23RD PHALGUNA 1932

¶5

LA.App..No. 175 of 2011(C) ------------------------------LAR.173/2000 of ADDL.SUB COURT,KOLLAM ....................

¶6

APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANTS

¶7

¶8

MADHUSOODHANAN, PUTHUKULATHU VAYALIL VEEDU, THRIKKADAVOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM.

¶9

LEELA, W/O. MADHUSOODHANAN, PUTHUKULATHU VAYALIL VEEDU, THRIKKADAVOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.JOHN BRITTO SRI.C.A.RAJEEV

¶11

RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT

¶12

¶13

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM.

¶14

SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.LATHA T. THANKAPPAN

¶15

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/03/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & N. K. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ.

¶17

L. A. A. No.175 of 2011

¶18

Dated this the 14^th day of March, 2011

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

Pius C. Kuriakose, J

¶21

The claimants are the appellants. Their property in Thrikkadavur village was acquired pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 28/03/96 for the purpose of National Highway Bye-pass, Kollam. The Land Acquisition Officer included the property in category-4 (reclaimed wetlands having access of Panchayath Road). The court below did not become inclined to rely on the documents produced by the claimants. Instead, what was done was to rely on judgments passed by this Court in some other cases and re-fixed the land value at 65% above what was awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. Thus, re-fixed land value came to Rs.38,918/-.

¶22

L. A. A. No.175 of 2011

¶23

-2-

¶24

The main ground which is raised in this appeal is that Ext.A1 should have been relied on. Ext.A1 related to acquisition of land pursuant to the same notification but in respect of property included in a inferior category i.e. category-5. The Land Acquisition Officer had awarded to the property in Ext.A1 the value of Rs.10,893/-. The court under Ext.A1 re-fixed the land value at Rs.49,655/-. We find that in this appeal, the claim is limited to re-fixation of the land value at Rs.28,990/- per Are only. Smt.Latha T. Thankappan, the learned senior Government Pleader would inform us very fairly that Ext.A1 has attained finality. According to us, as Ext.A1 in respect of an inferior category for which the court has granted value at the rate of Rs.49,650/- has become final, there is every justification for allowing this appeal in full. Allowing this appeal in full, we re-fix the market value of the land under acquisition at Rs.28,990/- per Are. The appellant will be entitled for all

¶25

L. A. A. No.175 of 2011 -3-

¶26

statutory benefits admissible under Sections 23(2), 23(1A) and under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act. However, while providing interest under Section 28, the Section will have due regard to the conditions imposed by this Court in our order in C.M. Application No.308/11 and 366/11. The appeal is allowed to the above extent, however, without any order as to costs.

¶27

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE

¶28

N. K. BALAKRISHNAN JUDGE

¶29

kns/-

Madhusoodhanan and Another v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhusoodhanan and Another v. State of Kerala

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

The Sree Sankaracharya Uty of Sanskrit Vs State of Kerala

T.v.Mohanan Vs the Special Tahsildar

O.P.Alippu Vs the District Collector

Ramachandran Unnithan Balchandran Unnith Vs State of Kerala

Lakshmi Karthikeyan Vs State of Kerala

The Secretary, Kodom Belur Grama Panchay Vs the Spl.Tahsildar (La), Kasargod