Dismissed

Maroli Vijayan and Another v. Government of Kerala,Rep.by Dt.Collector

Kerala HC31 Mar 2011LA.App./301/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court heard appeals against land acquisition compensation awards. Claimants argued the re-fixed market value was inadequate, seeking further increase. Relying on prior precedent and finding no cross objection from the respondent, the Court sustained the enhanced awards and dismissed the appeals without discretion on costs.

What the court decided

AI extract

Maroli Vijayan and Another Vs Government of Kerala,Rep.by… — 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 THURSDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2011 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1933 LA.App..No. 301 of 2010(A) -----------------------------LAR.200/2005 of PRL.S.C.,THALASSERY ....................

¶4

APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANTS

¶5

¶6

MAROLI VIJAYAN,KARTHIKA,P.O.MOORIYAD.

¶7

NELLIYODAN KARTHIYAYANI,KARTHIKA, P.O.MOORIYAD.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER SRI.P.P.RAMACHANDRAN

¶9

RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS

¶10

¶11

GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,KANNUR.

¶12

THE GENERAL MANAGER,KSIDC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶13

ADV. SRI.JOBY CYRIAC, SC, KSIDC FOR R2 SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT. LATHA T. THANKAPPAN

¶14

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/03/2011, ALONG WITH LAA NO.304 OF 2010 & CON. CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

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

¶16

L. A. A. Nos.301, 304, 352 & 701 of 2010

¶17

Dated this the 31^st day of March, 2011

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Pius C. Kuriakose, J

¶20

All these appeals are preferred by the claimants whose

¶21

lands in Koothuparamba village were acquired for the purpose of construction of a road leading to the Requisitioning Authority's Industrial Growth Centre at Valiavelicham. The properties were included by the Land Acquisition Officer in Group No.5 and he awarded land value at the rate of Rs.2,147/- per cent. Under the impugned judgments which have been passed by the Reference Court pursuant to an order of remand passed by this Court, the market value has been re-fixed at Rs.7,000/- per cent each.

¶22

In these appeals, grounds are raised contending that

¶23

even the re-fixed rate is inadequate. Sri.P.P.Ramachandran,

¶24

L. A. A. No.301/2010 & con. cases -2-

¶25

the learned counsel for the appellants would argue referring to various items of evidence which were available before the Reference Court that the Reference Court should have refixed the market value at least at Rs.9,000/- per cent.

¶26

The submission of Sri.Ramachandran were opposed by Sri.Joby Cyriac, the learned counsel for the Requisitioning Authority. Sri.Joby Cyriac would draw our attention to the common judgment of this Court in L.A.A.110/10 series and Cross Objections therein. Sri.Joby would submit that under that judgment, this Court has entered a finding that there is co-relation between the market value of the properties included in various categories acquired for the same purpose and that the claimants can at the most aspire for 130% increase over what was awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. We find from the impugned judgments that what is now received by the claimants is enhancement at still higher rates. In the absence of any

¶27

L. A. A. No.301/2010 & con. cases -3-

¶28

cross objection by the Requisitioning Authority, we are in a position to sustain the impugned awards. Hence, we dismiss

¶29

all the appeals, however, without any order as to costs.

¶30

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE

¶31

N. K. BALAKRISHNAN JUDGE

¶32

kns/-

Maroli Vijayan and Another v. Government of Kerala,Rep.by Dt.Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Maroli Vijayan and Another v. Government of Kerala,Rep.by Dt.Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Elizabeth Vs State of Kerala

Joseph Yudathadevoose @ Sajan Vs State of Kerala and Another

State of Kerala Vs S.Anil Kumar

K.C.George Vs the Spl.Tahsildar (L.a) Railways, Ekm

The General Manager, Ksidc, Tvm. Vs Maroli Mathu

The Fertilisers & Chemicals Ltd. Vs Sabeth