Allowed

Kannan B v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Mar 2011LA.App./857/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed appeals by claimants seeking higher land compensation for Changanassery by-pass acquisition. The land value was refixed from the acquisition officer's rate to Rs.1,71,255/- per Are. The Court enhanced the base value which proportionately increased injurious affection compensation but held that such additional amount is not eligible for riotous possession benefits under Sections 2

What did the court decide?

Market value of lands refixed at Rs.1,71,255 per Are; compulsory acquisition compensation benefits under Sections 23(2) and 23(1A) applicable only to base value, not to portion representing injurious

Kannan B 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

FRIDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2011 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1932

¶5

LA.App..No. 857 of 2010() ------------------------------LAR.101/2008 of PRL.SUB COURT,KOTTAYAM ....................

¶6

APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANT

¶7

-------------------------------

¶8

1. KANNAN.B, MALAYIL PADINJAREKUTTU, PERUNNA,CHANGANASSERY.

¶9

2. GOPAN.B.MALAYIL PADINJAREKUTTU, PERUNNA,CHANGANASSERY.

¶10

3. ASHOKAN B.MALAYIL PADINJAREKUTTU, PERUNNA,CHANGANASSERY,REPRESENTED BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, GOPAN B, 2ND APPELLANT IN THE LAA.

¶11

BY ADVS. SRI.SANTHOSH MODAYIL SRI.T.H.CHACKO

¶12

RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS

¶13

--------------------------------------

¶14

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,KOTTAYAM.

¶15

2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD ROADS DIVISION, KOTTAYAM.

¶16

R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. LATHA T. THANKAPPAN

¶17

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/03/2011, ALONG WITH LAA NO. 859 OF 2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

svs

¶19

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

¶20

L.A.A.Nos.857 and 859 of 2010

¶21

Dated this the 18th day of March, 2011

¶22

Judgment

¶23

Pius C.Kuriakose, J.

¶24

These appeals have been preferred by the claimants. Their lands in Changanassery village were acquired for the construction of Changanassery by-pass. The acquisition was pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 20.1.2005. The Land Acquisition Officer included the properties in category III and awarded land value at the rate of Rs.23,222/- per Are. The reference court on evaluating the evidence would refix the land value at Rs.37,155/- per Are. In these appeals, the appellants mainly pray that the market value of the land be refixed at Rs.1,71,255/- per Are. In L.A.A.No.857/2010, there is a further claim that the compensation for injurious affection also be increased. Smt.Latha T.Thankappan, learned Senior Government Pleader would fairly concede that in L.A.A.Nos.29/2011 and 1524/2008 this court has refixed the land value of properties acquired for the same purpose in the very same village, but in a

¶25

¶26

LAA 857 & 859/2010

¶27

different category at Rs.1,62,692/- per Are. The learned Senior Government Pleader submitted that if proportionate increase is given, the land value in these cases will have to be refixed at Rs.1,73,359/- per Are. She argued that as the appellants have limited their claims to Rs.1,71,255/- per Are, they cannot aspire for more value than at the above rate. Having considered the submissions addressed before us, we feel that both these appeals can be allowed and the market value of the lands can be refixed at Rs.1,71,255/- per Are. Accordingly, the market value of the lands under acquisition in both these cases will stand refixed at Rs.1,71,255/- per Are.

¶28

Coming to the claim for injurious affection in LAA No.857 of 2010, we are of the view that the percentage of diminution determined by the court below is the maximum that could have been found. We are not inclined to enhance the percentage of diminution. But it is needless to mention that as we have enhanced the land value, the amount to which the appellant is found eligible towards compensation for injurious affection will also proportionately increase. The appellants will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Sections 23(2), 23(1A)

¶29

LAA 857 & 859/2010 3

¶30

and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act. However, the amounts awarded towards compensation for injurious affection will not be eligible for the benefit under Sections 23(2) and 23(1A).

¶31

The appeals are allowed as above, however, without any

¶32

order as to costs.

¶33

PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE.

¶34

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.

¶35

srd

¶36

LAA 857 & 859/2010 4

¶37

LAA 857 & 859/2010 5

Kannan B v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kannan B 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

Gopalakrishnan @ Mottayandy, C.NO.795 Vs State of Kerala

Inland Waterways Authority of India Vs Shibu C.Senan

State of Kerala Vs L.Sreelekha and Others

State of Kerala Vs C.Renuka Devi

Prabhavathi Amma Vs State of Kerala

State of Kerala, Rep. by Spl. Tahsildar Vs Pattuvamveettil Raman and Another