Partly allowed

Aboobacker Haji v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC28 Feb 2011LA.App./199/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appellant challenged adequacy of land value fixed by Reference Court and denial of enhancement for a private road portion. Court set value at 70% above officer's award for all land, affirming enhancement applies to private road unlike public roads.

What did the court decide?

Re-fixing compensation for the entire land including the private road portion at 70% above the rate awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer.

Aboobacker Haji Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE 28TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 9TH PHALGUNA 1932

¶4

LA.App..No. 199 of 2010 (D) ------------------------------------LAR.257/2007 of III ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM ....................

¶5

APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT NO.1

¶6

¶7

ABOOBACKER HAJI, AGED 78 YEARS, S/O.KUNJU MOHAMMED HAJI, VELUTHEDATH HOUSE, EDAPPALLY VADAKKUMBHAGAM KARA, EDAPPALLY NORTH VILLAGE IN KANAYANNOOR TALUK.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.N.NEELAKANDHAN NAMBOODIRI SRI.P.S.NARAYANA RAJA

¶9

RESPONDENT(S): REPONDENTS

¶10

¶11

STATE OF KERALA BY THE SPECIAL TAHSIDAR (LA),OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL TAHSIDAR (LA) N.H.NO.1.,KAKKANAD

¶12

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, N.H.(B)DIVISION,KODUNGALLOOR.

¶13

KUNJU PATHUMMA,

¶14

D/O.KUNJUMOHAMMED, VELUTHEDATH HOUSE,EDAPPALLY VADAKKUMBHAGAM KARA, EDAPPALLY NORTH VILLAGE KANAYANNOOR TALUK,

¶15

NEAR JUMA MASJID,SUBBASH CHANDRA BOSE ROAD,

¶16

KOCHI-682024.

¶17

BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LATHA T. THANKAPPAN

¶18

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

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

¶20

-----------------------------------------------L. A. A. No.199 of 2010

¶21

-----------------------------------------------Dated this the 28^th day of February, 2011

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

Pius C. Kuriakose, J

¶24

The first claimant is in appeal. His land in Edappally(N) village was acquired by the Government pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 14/03/02. The land was included in category-3 and the Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.1,59,000/- per Are. The Reference Court under the impugned judgment would re-fix the land value at Rs.2,54,000/- per Are. 0.92 Ares of land was lying as a pathway. For this portion the Land Acquisition Officer awarded only Rs.100/- per Are. There was claim for enhancement of market value of the above portion also.

¶25

Before the Reference Court the appellants relied mostly

¶26

on Ext.A2 and other documents. These documents reflected much

¶27

higher value. The court below did not place any reliance on those

¶28

L. A. A. No.199 of 2010 -2-

¶29

documents. Ultimately what the court below did was to re-fix the market value by applying the rule of thumb about at least 60% above what was awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. Thus, the market vlaue of the land was re-fixed at Rs.2,54,000/-. However, as regards the portion (which was lying as road - 0.92

¶30

Ares), the court below did not award any enhancement.

¶31

In this appeal various grounds are raised challenging the

¶32

adequacy of the market value fixed and also the action of the court below in not awarding any enhancement for road portion. Sri.P.S.Narayana Raja, the learned counsel for the appellant addressed arguments in support of the grounds. according to him, the court below was not at all justified in placing any reliance on the documents produced, particularly Ext.A2 which according to him, was properly proved. Smt.Latha T. Thankappan, the learned senior Government Pleader would draw our attention to earlier judgment of this Court wherein allowing Government's appeal we have re-fixed market value of the

¶33

L. A. A. No.199 of 2010

¶34

-3-

¶35

identical land at maximum rate of 70% above the rate awarded

¶36

by the Land Acquisition Officer i.e. at Rs.2,70,300/-.

¶37

We have anxiously considered the rival submissions

¶38

addressed at the Bar. Though Sri.Raja was very persuasive we are not inclined to say that the learned Subordinate Judge has gone wrong in discarding the documents including Ext.A2. At the same time, we feel that there is justification for re-fixing the market value of the land under acquisition at Rs.2,70,300/- per Are (i.e. 70% above the rate awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer). We find much force in the submission of Sri.Raja that the land value should have been awarded for the road portion also at the above rate. After all, it was not a public road. It was only a private road used by the claimants for their own private purposes. Hence, it is our view that for the road portion extending to 0.92 Ares, the appellant is entitled for the land value at Rs.2,70,300/- per Are. The appellant is awarded compensation for the above portion also at the above rate.

¶39

L. A. A. No.199 of 2010

¶40

-4-

¶41

The appeal is allowed to the above extent only. The appellant will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Sections 23(2), 23(1A) and under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act for the re-fixed compensation to which he becomes eligible by virtue of this judgment. In the circumstances, proportionate cost (cost in proportion to the success in this appeal) will also be paid to the appellants.

¶42

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE

¶43

N. K. BALAKRISHNAN JUDGE

¶44

kns/-

Aboobacker Haji v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aboobacker Haji 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

Ouseph Vs State

State Vs Kalikutty

Palakkal Ayisha Vs District Collector

Sreekumar @ Kumar, C.NO.6449, Tvm Vs State of Kerala

Kochi International Airport Society Vs Janaki Amma

State of Kerala Vs R.Srinivasan