Allowed

Baby v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC24 Mar 2011LA.App./190/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed the land acquisition appeal, refixing market compensation values for dry and wet land. The court condoned a significant delay in filing the appeal subject to a monetary penalty and specific conditions, while barring interest on the enhanced compensation during the condoned delay period.

What did the court decide?

Refixation of compensation at Rs. 22,230 per are for dry land and Rs. 2,265 per are for wet land; condonation of 1267 days delay subject to payment of costs and waiver of interest during that period.

Baby 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

THURSDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2011 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1933

¶5

LA.App..No. 190 of 2011()

¶6

------------------------LAR.81/2003 of SUB COURT, CHERTHALA ....................

¶7

APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT

¶8

¶9

BABY,S/O.GOVINDAN, KALARIKKAL, PALLIPURAM,,CHERTHALA.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.G.D.PANICKER SMT.JEENA JOSEPH

¶11

RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS

¶12

¶13

STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA),CHERTHALA 688 524.

¶14

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSIDC ,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶15

ADV. SRI.JOBY CYRIAC,SC,KSIDC

¶16

BY GOVT.PLEADER SMT.T.TJOSEPHINA

¶17

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

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

¶19

L.A.A,No. 190 OF 2011

¶20

Dated this the 24^th day of March, 2011

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

Pius C.Kuriakose, J.

¶23

This appeal is filed by the claimant whose land in

¶24

Pallipppuram village was acquired for the purpose of establishment of Industrial Growth Centre for KSIDC.

¶25

Having considered the submissions addressed before us by Smt.Jeena Joseph, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri.Joby Cyriac, learned standing counsel for the KSIDC, we are inclined to rely on the judgment of this court in L.A.A. No.1209/2008 and allow the appeal to a certain extent. Accordingly allowing this appeal, we refix the market value of the dry land under acquisition at Rs.22,230/- per Are. Similarly, we refix the market value of the wet land at Rs.2265/- per Are.

¶26

The appellant will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under section 23(2), 23(1A) and Section 28 of the Act on the total refixed compensation to which he becomes eligible by virtue of this judgment. However, while providing for interest

¶27

L.A.A.No.190/2011 2

¶28

under Section 28, the Section will have due regard to the conditions imposed by us in our order dated 3/3/2001 in C.M.Appln. No.393/2011. The decree copy will be issued to the appellant only after ensuring that the full court fee is paid and the conditions imposed by us in C.M.Appln. No.393/2011 are complied with. The parties will suffer costs of this appeal.

¶29

PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE

¶30

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE

dpk

L.A.A.No.190/2011

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

¶35

C.M.Appln. 393 of 2011 in L.A.A.No. 190 OF 2011

¶36

Dated this the 3^rd day of March, 2011

O R D E R

Pius C.Kuriakose, J.

L.A.A.No.190/2011 4

There is stiff opposition to the grant of this application, which seeks condonation of delay of 1267 days. In fact, the affidavit sworn to by the appellant in respect of the application is not at all convincing. However, on the consideration that as far as possible causes should be allowed to be adjudicated on their merits rather than decided on technicalities, we are inclined to condone the delay imposing proper conditions. Hence, this application will stand allowed subject to the following conditions;

¶41

i). The appellant shall pay a sum of Rs.1250/- to the Government through the office of the Advocate General within 10 days from today and produce receipt.

¶42

ii). The appellant shall pay a sum of Rs.750/- to the High Court Legal Services committee within the same time limit.

¶43

Iii). In the event of the appeal being allowed and the appellant becoming eligible for enhanced compensation, such enhanced compensation will not carry interest otherwise admissible under Section 28 of the L.A.Act during the period of 1267 days condoned by this order.

¶44

Annex a copy of this order to the judgment to be passed in the appeal. The Registry will send up the appeal for admission

¶45

L.A.A.No.190/2011

¶46

¶47

once the receipts against payment of costs are noticed.

¶48

PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE

¶49

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE

¶50

dpk

Baby v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baby 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Inland Waterways Authority of India Vs Norbert and Others

State of Kerala Vs Indira Bhai and Another

State of Kerala Vs P.a.Pappachan

Mohammed Kannu Mohammed Ibrahim Vs State of Kerala

Smt.Krishnaveni and Others Vs the Special Tahsildar (La), Railways

Padmavathi Vs the Special Thasildar (La) Nh Division