This Court dismissed an appeal challenging the award of enhanced compensation of Rs. 27,945/- in a land acquisition case. Finding no illegality in the impugned judgment, the Court noted the matter became academic.
Impugned judgment dated 20.08.2011 dismissed with no order as to costs.
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 B.KEMAL PASHA
THURSDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2014/15TH JYAISHTA, 1936
LA.App..No. 812 of 2012 ()
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN LAR 45/2010 of SUB COURT, KASARAGOD DATED 20-08-2011
APPELLANTS/REFERING OFFICER AND RESPONDENTS::
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER
RESPONDENT/CLAIMANT:
A.ABDUL HAMEED
S/O.KULAVAYALIL MUHAMMED, KULAVAYAL, AJANOOR VILLAGE HOSDURG TULUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT PIN 670 121.
BY ADV. SMT.R.LEELA
THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05-06-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
B.KEMAL PASHA, J.
L.A.A. No.812 of 2012
Dated this the 5th day of June, 2014
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The respondent in L.A.R. No.45/2010 of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Kasaragod has come up in appeal challenging the judgment dated 20.08.2011 passed by the said court, whereby an enhanced compensation of ₹27,945/- with other statutory benefits was granted to the respondent herein.
LAA.812/2012
: 2 :
The respondent produced Ext.A1 sale deed dated 29.08.2008 concerning 25 cents of property for which the consideration was shown as ₹75,000/- per cent. A Commission was also taken out and Ext.X1 report was obtained. Considering all the evidence, the court below fixed the land value at the rate of ₹60,000/- per cent and consequently, an enhanced compensation of ₹27,945/- was awarded.
3. Heard the learned Government Pleader for the
appellants and the learned counsel for the respondent.
for the respondent has pointed out that the entire amounts of enhanced compensation coupled with all the statutory benefits was deposited by the appellants before the court below and the same was withdrawn by the respondent on 15.03.2013. Presently, the matter has become merely academic. On going through the evidence, and the contents of Ext.A1 as well as Ext.X1, it seems that the land value fixed by the court below is not exorbitant. Even though the
LAA.812/2012
: 3 :
learned Government Pleader has pointed out that Ext.A1 is a post notification document, it seems that the said document was executed within six months from the notification, that too concerning a considerable extent of property. It cannot be believed that Ext.A1 was executed for the purpose of obtaining an undue enhancement of land value in this case.
In the result, this appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Sd/- (B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE)
aks/05/06
// True Copy //
PA to Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the enhanced compensation awarded by the lower court on land acquisition is liable to be interfered with by this Court.
State of Kerala
A.ABDUL HAMEED
B.KEMAL PASHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
