Allowed

Somasekharan Midhila v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC20 Mar 2012LA.App./151/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court modified the land value awarded in an acquisition case for road upgradation from the rate fixed by the Reference Court to a higher rate of Rs. 2,57,000 per are. Allowing the Land Acquisition Appeal in full, the Court fixed the market value and directed the payment of statutory benefits.

What did the court decide?

Land value re-fixed at Rs. 2,57,000 per are; appeal allowed in full for claim of Rs. 2,47,000 per are; statutory benefits to be paid.

Somasekharan Midhila Vs the State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

¶4

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI

¶6

TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2012/30TH PHALGUNA 1933

¶7

LA.App..No. 151 of 2012 (C)

¶8

LAR.33/09 OF ADDL. SUB COURT, KOTTAYAM

¶9

APPELLANTS/CLAIMANTS IN THE COURT BELOW:

¶10

SOMASEKHARAN MIDHILA

¶11

CHERTHALA, PADINJAREKOCHIYIL, PERUNNA CHANGANACHERRY.

¶12

KOMALAVALLIAMMA @ KOMALAM

¶13

PADINJAREKOCHIYIL, PERUNNA, CHANGANACHERRY.

¶14

CHANDRASEKHARAN

¶15

PADINJAREKOCHIYIL, PERUNNA, CHANGANACHERRY.

¶16

BY ADV. DR.V.N.SANKARJEE

¶17

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS IN THE COURT BELOW :

¶18

THE STATE OF KERALA

¶19

REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR KOTTAYAM-686 001.

¶20

THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR LA(NH) CHANGANACHERRY-686 101.

¶21

THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER

¶22

PWD, KSTP, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶23

BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.R.SYAMKUMAR

¶24

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-03-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & A. V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, JJ.

¶26

L. A. A No.151 of 2012

¶27

Dated this the 20^th day of March, 2012

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

Pius C. Kuriakose, J

¶30

The claimants are the appellants. Their land with a small building in Changanacherry village was acquired pursuant to Section 4(1) notification published on 18/05/05 for the purpose of upgradation of the main central road. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of 1,60,619/- per Are. For the building he awarded a total compensation of 29,617/- per Are. The Reference Court under the impugned judgment upheld the appellants' claim for enhanced compensation towards the building value in full. This appeal is confined to their claim for land value. Reference Court did not award any enhancement in land value. The Reference Court rightly took the view that the documents produced by the appellants cannot be relied on

¶31

L. A. A No.151 of 2012 -2-

¶32

as one of them is a post notification document and the other is fair value order passed by the Government.

¶33

We have heard the submissions of Sri.V.N.Sankarjee, the learned counsel for the appellants and Sri.C.R.Syamkumar, the learned Senior Government Pleader. According to Sri.Sankarjee, the land value approved by the Reference Court is too low. According to Sri.C.R.Syamkumar, in the absence of evidence, the learned Subordinate Judge cannot be blamed for having confirmed the award of the Land Acquisition Officer.

¶34

Having considered the rival submissions addressed and having kept in mind other judgments of this Court pertaining to acquisition of land in Changanacherry village for other purposes, we are of the view that the market value of the land under acquisition can be re-fixed at 2,57,000/per Are. We find that in the present appeal the claim is limited to 2,47,000/- per Are only. Under the above circumstances, we allow the appeal in full. The appellants will be entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under

¶35

L. A. A No.151 of 2012 -3-

¶36

Sections 23(2), 23(1A) and under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act on the land value re-fixed by this judgment. Parties are directed to suffer their respective costs. Decree copy will be issued to the appellants only after ensuring that the full court fee payable on the appeal memorandum is remitted by the appellants.

¶37

Sd/PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE

¶38

Sd/A. V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE

¶39

kns/-

¶40

//TRUE COPY//

¶41

P.A. TO JUDGE

Somasekharan Midhila v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Somasekharan Midhila v. the 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

Saleelam Vs Sajith K.S.

State of Kerala Vs Bhaskaran Rajendra Babu

Jayasree Vs R.Chandrasekharan

Jose Vs State of Kerala

Chinnamma Vs State of Kerala

Sivadasan Vs P.M.Shajivasan