Allowed

K.B.Ramachandran Nair v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Jun 2014LA.App./398/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the land acquisition appeal against the reference court's judgment. The appeal challenging the quantum of compensation for acquiring land for a Railway Over Bridge was dismissed partly as the lower court was remanded to consider connected cases and evidence afresh within six months.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; judgment and decree set aside; matter remanded for fresh consideration within six months; interest on enhanced land value for condoned delay period denied.

K.B.Ramachandran Nair Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2014/16TH JYAISHTA, 1936

¶5

LA.App..No. 398 of 2013

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN LAR 90/2009 of III ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM DATED 29-10-2010

¶7

APPELLANT/CLAIMANT:

¶8

K.B.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,

¶9

S/O.GOVINDAN NAIR, KURUNGATTU (H), THAIKKARA, KEEZHILLAM P.O., PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.VARGHESE K.PAUL

¶11

SRI.ANITH JAMES

¶12

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶13

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA.) KOCHI CORPORATION VYTTILA - 19. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA.

¶14

CORPORATION OF KOCHI, PARK AVENUE, PIN - 682 011, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶15

R2 BY ADV. SRI.E.D.GEORGE, SC, COCHIN CORPORATION R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.ROSE MICHAEL

¶16

BY SRI.P.K.SOYUZ, SC, COCHIN CORPORATION

¶17

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-06-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

HARUN-UL-RASHID & ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JJ.

¶19

L.A.A.No.398 of 2013

¶20

Dated this the 06^th day of June, 2014

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

HARUN-UL-RASHID, J.

¶23

Government Pleader takes notice for respondent No.1. Standing Counsel takes notice for respondent No.2

¶24

The claimant is the appellant. The appeal is directed

¶25

against the judgment and decree in L.A.R.No.90 of 2009 on the file of the Sub Court, Ernakulam. The extent of property acquired is 0.41 Ares (1.013 cents) of land, comprised in Sy.No.478/2 of Ernakulam Village with structures and improvements owned by the claimant. The acquisition was for constructing Railway Over Bridge at Pullepady. Notification under Section 4(1) and 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 08/04/2003. The acquired land comes under Category No.C. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the land value at ₹3,02,897/- per Are and the Reference Court granted enhancement and re-fixed the land

¶26

L.A.A.No.398 of 2013

¶27

¶28

value at ₹5,30,069/-. The claimant is aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded. The parties are

¶29

hereinafter referred to as arrayed in the Claim Petition.

¶30

The learned counsel for the appellant submits that several items of properties were also acquired under the very same notification for the very same purpose. In the connected case (L.A.R.No.101 of 2009) the decree and judgment were challenged in L.A.A.No.393 of 2011, this Court set aside the decree and judgment and directed the court below to consider and dispose of the case afresh. The sale deed No.5332 of 1995 is marked as Ext.A3 in that case. This Court directed the court below to consider Ext.A3 sale deed No.5332 of 1995 as well, which relates to the value of the land just 200 metres away from the acquired property. The only difference is that the said property is Category No.B property. Another connected matter, namely, L.A.R.No.91 of 2009 on the file of the 3^rd Additional Sub Court, Ernakulam, was also remanded by this Court by judgment dated 11/9/2012 in L.A.A.No.313 of 2012.

¶31

¶32

L.A.A.No.398 of 2013

¶33

In the result, this Appeal is allowed and judgment and decree under appeal is set aside. The case is remanded to the court below for fresh consideration. The court below shall afford opportunity to both sides to adduce further evidence, if so advised.

¶34

Apart from land value, the claimant claims compensation for injurious affection, enhanced land value for building and shifting charges etc.

¶35

The court below shall dispose of the matter as early as possible, at any rate, within a period of six months from the date of appearance. The parties shall appear before the court below on 02/07/2014 . The claimant is entitled to the refund of full court fee.

¶36

The appeal was filed belatedly with a petition to condone the delay of 676 days. This Court by order dated 12^th June, 2013 condoned the delay subject to the condition that, ultimately, if this Court awards enhanced land value, the appellant will not be entitled to interest on that land value for

¶37

L.A.A.No.398 of 2013

¶38

¶39

the period of 676 days. It is made clear that, in case Reference Court grants enhanced compensation, the claimant will not be entitled to interest for the period of 676 days.

¶40

Sd/- HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE

¶43

skj

¶44

True copy

¶45

P.A to Judge

K.B.Ramachandran Nair v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.B.Ramachandran Nair 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Kerala Vs a.Yayasree

C.Sasi Kumar Vs Anitha Kumari

Jaffer Vs Penchali Jafer

Rajeev Shenoy K.R. Vs the Official Liquidator

State of Kerala Vs Radhakumari

State of Kerala Vs Nalini