Allowed

Udayakumari v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Feb 2015LA.App./846/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the land acquisition appeal, enhancing the land value to 12,35,000 per Are. It also awarded additional compensation of 18,000 for structures, rejecting the Land Acquisition Officer's PWD-based valuation in favor of the Commissioner's report.

What did the court decide?

Land value refixed at 12,35,000 per Are; additional 18,000 granted for structures; statutory benefits upheld.

Udayakumari Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶5

WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/29TH MAGHA, 1936

¶6

LA.App..No. 846 of 2012 ()

¶7

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN LAR 238/2009 of I ADDL.SUB COURT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶8

APPELLANT:

¶9

UDAYAKUMARI

¶10

D/O.N.BAHULEYAN, M.B.S.BHAVAN, KAPPIL P.O. EDAVA, CHIRAYINKIL TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.BASANT BALAJI

¶12

RESPONDENT:

¶13

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THIRUVANANTHAPURM-695001.

¶14

2. THE SECRETARY TRIDA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶15

R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.A.JALEEL, SC., TRIDA R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.L.ALOYSIOUS THOMAS

¶16

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.V.ASHA, JJ.

¶18

¶19

LAA No.846 of 2012

¶20

¶21

Dated this the 18^th day of February, 2015

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

Ramachandran Nair, J.

¶24

This appeal is filed from the judgment and decree in L.A.R.No.238/2009 of the Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The acquisition in this case was for the purpose of widening of G.G.Hospital-Kumarapuram-Poonthy-Anamugham NH bye-pass. The notification under Section 4(1) was published on 26.6.2006. The land acquisition officer awarded land value @ 1,97,775/- per Are. For the compound wall and gate, an amount of 13,744/- has been awarded. In this appeal, the learned counsel for the appellant seeks enhancement of land value as well as for the structures.

¶25

The reference court has refixed the land value to 10,91,500/- per Are and as far as enhancement sought for the structures, no amount has been granted. The learned counsel relied upon the common judgment of this Court in LAA No.31/2013 and

¶26

LAA No.846/2012 2

¶27

connected cases. In the said judgment, we have fixed land value at `12,35,000/- per Are in respect of garden land situated in Reach I, II

¶28

and III-A. Therefore as far as the appellant is concerned, he is entitled to land value @ `12,35,000/- per Are.

¶29

As far as the value of structures, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the report of the Commissioner was not accepted by the trial court which is not justifiable. Our attention was invited to the discussion on point No.2. We have gone through the report of the Commissioner, wherein as far as the appellant is concerned, value of the structure is assessed at 40372/-, out of which 15% has been reduced for depreciation. Therefore, the correct value will be 34,317/-. The value of the structures fixed by the land acquisition officer is `13,744/-. We have perused the valuation made by the land acquisition officer where he has not given the split up details of the structures and the value thereon. It is clear from the judgment of this Court in State of Kerala and another v. Sushama

¶30

Kumari ( 2010(2) KHC 834) that the compensation fixed by the land acquisition authority relying solely on the valuation prepared by the Engineers of the Public Works Department cannot be approved. The

¶31

LAA No.846/2012 3

¶32

said view was taken on the finding that the PWD rates are not realistic.

¶33

The learned Senior Government Pleader submits that the

¶34

report of the Commissioner cannot be accepted in toto without any supporting materials to show the market value of the items, used for construction of structures.

¶35

Even if certain guess work has been made, the difference in price will be only come 20,000/-. Even after giving due reduction for the variations in market value, according to us, at any rate, 18,000/- can be granted as additional compensation under this head. Therefore, we allow the appeal and the land value is refixed at 12,35,000/- per Are and the appellant will also be entitled for an additional value of 18,000/- for the structures. The appellant will also be entitled for statutory benefits as granted by the trial court.

¶36

The appeal is accordingly allowed. Parties will suffer their costs in the appeal.

¶37

T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE

¶38

P.V.ASHA, JUDGE

¶39

sv.

Udayakumari v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Udayakumari 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

State of Kerala Vs R Mohanan

Rossy Vs M. Kumaraswamy

Rajagopal Vs Jose Deneesh

N.Sivadasan Vs Majeed

V.O.Chacko Vs Nafeesa

Monor Noufal N. Vs Sadasivan