This appeal challenges a reference court's order re-fixing land value for railway acquisition. The High Court found the reference court's valuation reasonable based on locality and evidence, declining to interfere with the enhanced compensation.
The appeal was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH
MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2013/18TH BHADRA, 1935
LA.App..No. 425 of 2013 (A)
[AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23-11-2009 IN L.A.R.NO.109/2009 OF THE SUB COURT, CHENGANNUR]
APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR L.A, RAILWAYS, KAYAMKULAM.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. A.J. JOSE.
RESPONDENTS/CLAIMANT & 2ND RESPONDENT:
1. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, THUMPATTETH, PULIYUR VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK- 689 121.
2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, ERNAKULAM SOUTH- 682 011.
R1 BY ADVS.SRI.R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN, SRI. P.M.MATHEWS, R2 BY ADV. SRI.JOHN MATHEW,S.C.
THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-09-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Prv.
THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.
=========================
L.A.A. No.425 of 2013
============================ Dated this the 9th day of September, 2013
J U D G M E N T
This appeal at the instance of the State arises from
the judgment and decree dated 23.11.2009 in LAR No. 109 of 2009 of the Sub Court, Chengannur.
village was acquired for doubling of railway line pursuant to the notification under Sec.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short, “the Act”) dated 20.09.2005. The Land Acquisition Officer (for short, “the LAO”) fixed land value at Rs.16,776/- per Are. On a reference, the reference court has re-fixed land value at Rs.50,000/- per Are. Appellant is aggrieved and has preferred this appeal.
L.A.A. No.425 of 2013 2
relied on the evidence of AW.1 on behalf of the first respondent and Ext.R1, mahazar dated 22.03.2005 prepared by the appellant to contend that land value re-fixed by the reference court is reasonable.
where there is some reference to the importance of the locality. AW.1 has given evidence regarding importance
L.A.A. No.425 of 2013 3
of the acquired land. He has stated in cross-examination that Puliyoor post office and block office are situated about 200 meter away from the acquired land. Puliyoor temple is about 200 meter away. AW.1 has asserted the above and that is not shown to be incorrect. Moreover, the basic document relied on by the appellant and second respondent is also not produced in the reference court.
has placed reliance on the decision in Shaji Kuriakose V. Indian Oil Corporation (2002(1) KLT 381) to hold that land value has to be re-fixed.
The appeals fails. It is dismissed.
Sd/- THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE
Smv
//true copy//
P.A. to Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the learned reference court was justified in re-fixing the land value at Rs.50,000 per Are.
Whether the enhancement allowed by the reference court calls for interference by this Court.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Shaji Kuriakose V. Indian Oil CorporationReferred¶35
Shaji Kuriakose V. Indian Oil Corporation (2002(1) KLT 381)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
State of Kerala
Ramakrishna Pillai
Deputy Chief Engineer, Southern Railway
Thomas P. Joseph
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
