Remanded

Inland Waterways Authority of India v. Ragini and Another

Kerala HC14 Jan 2011LA.App./279/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court set aside the judgment of the Lower Appellate Court regarding land acquisition compensation. The matter was remanded to the trial court for a fresh decision, allowing the appellant to cite relevant precedents from the same village and purpose.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment and decree set aside; LAR No. 123/03 remanded to Addl. Sub Court, Kollam for fresh decision; full court fee remitted.

Inland Waterways Authority of India Vs Ragini and Another — 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 K.SURENDRA MOHAN

¶3

FRIDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2011 / 24TH POUSHA 1932

¶4

LA.App..No. 279 of 2009(D) -------------------------LAR.123/2003 of ADDL.SUB COURT,KOLLAM ....................

¶5

APPELLANT(S): ADDL.2ND RESPONDENT

¶6

¶7

INLAND WATERWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, PARAMARA SHOPPING COMPLEX, PARAMARA ROAD, KOCHI-682 018, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, (NOW OFFICE AT HOUSE NO.1/631/A, KANADIKADU AREA, MARADU P.O., KOCHI-682 304.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.V.SANTHARAM, SC, IWAI

¶9

RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS AND FIRST RESPONDENT

¶10

¶11

RAGINI, D/O.BHARGAVI, THURUTHEL PUTHEN VEEDU, PANMANA MURI, PANMANA VILLAGE, KOLLAM.

¶12

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.N.SUNIL JOSEPH FOR R1

¶13

GOVT. PLEADER SMT. T.T.JOSEPHINA

¶14

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.

¶16

LAA. No. 279 of 2009

¶17

Dated this the 14^th day of January, 2011

¶18

J U D G M E N T

¶19

Pius C.Kuriakose, J.

¶20

The requisitioning authority, the Inland Waterways Authority of India is in appeal. The property was in Panmana Village of Kollam District. Under the impugned judgment the reference court has refixed value of the land under acquisition at Rs.39,000/- per Are, enhancing the same to that rate from Rs.13,859/- per Are by the L.A. Officer. Mr. V.Santharam, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the rate of enhancement granted is 162%. Mr. Santharam drew our attention to various judgments of this Court pertaining to the acquisition for the same purpose and in the same village approving the enhancement granted by the reference court at 60%. The present enhancement, according to the learned counsel is without any support of any legal evidence. We find some force in the submission of

¶21

LAA. No. 279/09

¶22

-2-

¶23

the learned counsel for the appellant. However, we are not inclined to decide this issue finally. We set aside the judgment and decree under appeal and remand LAR. No. 123/03 to the Addl. Sub Court, Kollam. That court is directed to take a fresh decision. It is open to the appellant to produce before that court the judgments of this Court approving land value for properties in the same village acquired for the same purpose. Refund full court fee remitted on the appeal memo to the learned counsel for the appellant.

¶24

(PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE)

¶25

(K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE)

¶26

ksv/-

Inland Waterways Authority of India v. Ragini and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Inland Waterways Authority of India v. Ragini and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A.R. Ratheesh Chandran Vs Sarojini Amma

Jown Juma Masjid Vs K.a.Stepehn

Allyamma Kuruvila Vs Kuruvila John

M.C.Nalini Vs Special Thasildar

Kayaroth Kuniyil Karthiyani Vs State of Kerala

M.C.Bharathan Vs Special Tahasildar