Allowed

Lekshmikutty Amma v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC26 May 2016WP(C)/8474/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed respondent authorities to pay enhanced land acquisition compensation of Rs.4,31,534/- along with interest to the petitioner within three months, allowing attachment of respondent properties if necessary.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents 1-3 to pay Rs.4,31,534/- plus Rs.92,778.7 interest within three months, with powers to attach properties of respondents 4-5; additional 10% per annum interest remitted.

Lekshmikutty Amma Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MAY 2016/5TH JYAISHTA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 8474 of 2011 (H)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

LEKSHMIKUTTY AMMA PEARL BHAVAN, FLAT NO. 5B VAZHUTHACAUD, OPP. WOMEN'S COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI

¶9

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶10

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶11

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR KOLLAM - 695 534.

¶12

3. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LAND ACQUISITION, KOLLAM -691 534.

¶13

4. THE DIRECTOR, CO-OPERATIVE ACADEMY FOR PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION, CO-BANK TOWERS, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 691 001.

¶14

5. THE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL CENTRE FOR COIR RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, KUDAPPANAKKUNNU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 691 001.

¶15

BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. E.M. ABDUL KHADER

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26-05-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

¶18

...2/-

¶19

WP(C).No. 8474 of 2011 (H)

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

¶22

EXT.P1	: COPY OF THE AWARD NOTICE DATED 8/6/1988.
EXT.P2	COPY OF THE AWARD DATED NIL.
EXT.P3	COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 21/1/03.
EXT.P4	COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28/3/08 IN WP(C) NO. 6007/08 BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM.
EXT.P5	COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 21/2/09.
EXT.P6	COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12/6/09 ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXT.P7	COPY OF THE RECTIFIED AWARD PROPOSAL TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM ALONG WITH COMMUNICATION DATED 25/7/2003 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXT.P8	TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 19/9/09 TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
EXT.P9	TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 14/12/09 TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
EXT.P10	TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 14/5/2010 TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

¶23

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS :

¶24

EXT.R3(a) : GO(MS) 51/2006/ID DATED 2.5.2006.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

P.V.ASHA, J.

W.P.(C) No.8474 of 2011

¶30

Dated this the 26^th day of May, 2016

¶31

JUDGMENT

¶32

This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the delay in payment of the enhanced compensation due to the petitioner in terms of the award passed on her application under section 28A, as early as on 27.8.2009.

¶33

As per Ext.P1 an extent of 12.55 ares of the petitioner's property in survey No.5130/1 in Panayam Village, Kollam Taluk was acquired by Government and an award for a sum of Rs.100839.30 was passed as per Ext.P1 on 8.6.1988 in LA case No.6 of 1987. Thereafter, on coming to know about the judgment and decree in LAA No.171 of 1993, the petitioner submitted an application under section 28A of Land Acquisition Act seeking redetermination of compensation. She thereafter approached this

¶34

Court in W.P.(C) No.6007 of 2008. Based on the directions from this Court in Ext.P4 judgment dated 28.3.2008, the petitioner's application was considered, though without notice to the petitioner and an award was passed as per Ext.P5 in the year 2009. As there was mistake in calculation of the amount, the

¶35

:2:

¶36

W.P.(C) No.8474 of 2011

¶37

District Collector returned the same to the Special Tahsildar, Kollam as per Ext.P6 letter dated 12.6.2009 and a revised award Ext.P7 was passed on 28.7.2009 enhancing the compensation to the tune of Rs.4,31,534.23. As per this award, it can be seen that the balance amount to be paid to the petitioner was Rs.1,43,437.31 along with a sum of Rs.8,350.08 towards interest @ 9% interest for the period from 25.5.1988 to 24.5.1989 and Rs.92778.7 towards interest @ 15% interest for the period from 25.5.1989 to 30.6.2009.

¶38

The petitioner filed this writ petition on 17.3.2011 seeking directions to the respondents to pay a sum of Rs.5,65,051/- along with interest at the rate of 20% from the date of Section 4(1) notification until the date of payment of the compensation. According to the petitioner, the amount covered by the award in Ext.P5 to the tune of Rs.5,65,051/- was not liable to be reduced without notice to her. But it is seen that, that award was revised seeing that there was mistake in calculation of interest. At any rate, the enhanced compensation awarded on redetermination is is not disbursed to the petitioner so far. Petitioner has another grievance that she was not issued any

¶39

:3:

¶40

W.P.(C) No.8474 of 2011

¶41

notice regarding the re-determination and she had to get the award on application under the Right to Information Act.

¶42

The 3^rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that the acquisition was made for the purpose of Kerala Special Refractories Ltd (KSRL) at Perumon. Subsequent to the acquisition the company could not function properly and in the year 1996 Government decided to wind up KSRL. 25 acres of the

¶43

land acquired for KSRL was alloted to Co-Operative Academy of Professional Education (CAPE) and 8.5 acres were allotted to Centre for Development of Coir Technology (C-DOCT). It is stated that payment could not be effected due to non availability of funds from the requisitioning authorities-CAPE and NCRMI- the 4^th and 5^th respondents who are occupants of the acquired land after liquidation of Kerala Special Refractories at Peruman. It is stated that the District Collector, Kollam had instructed the 3^rd respondent to approach respondents 4 and 5. The 3^rd respondent requested for the fund from them. But even after repeated reminders they have not remitted the same. It is stated that in the light of G.O.(Ms) 51/2006/ID dated 2.5.2006 respondents 4 and 5 are to share the funds equally. From Ext.R3(a)

¶44

:4:

¶45

W.P.(C) No.8474 of 2011

¶46

Government order dated 2.5.2006, it is seen that the Director of CAPE had requested the Government as per its letter dated 3.6.2000 to transfer the ownership of 25 acres of land acquired for KSRL. Similarly the Director of C.DOCT had also requested for allotment of 8.5 acres of land from the said land in order to establish high tech spare part and accordingly the Government had issued orders as per G.O.(Ms) No.80/2000/ID dated 24.6.2000 allowing advance possession of 25 acres of land under the possession and ownership of KSRM to CAPE to start a new Engineering College and balance of land to C.DOCT for establishing high tech coir fed on condition that both these institutions would execute agreement with M/s.KSRL. Further the Government accorded sanction to treat the advance possession of land of KSRL ordered therein as per order dated 21.6.2000 to the CAPE and C.DOCT as sold for a token consideration of Rs.1/subject to the specific condition that all the pending and future liabilities consequent on the earlier acquisition of the land for KSRL will be borne equally by concerned organizations that is CAPE and C.DOCT equally. It is on the basis of the above provisions contained in Ext.R3(a) order that the 3^rd respondent

¶47

:5:

¶48

W.P.(C) No.8474 of 2011

¶49

says that the compensation is to be paid by them. According to the 3^rd respondent, as per the provisions in Ext.R3(a), it is for the 4^th and 5^th respondents to provide funds for payment of compensation to the petitioner.

¶50

Though notice has been issued to respondent 4 and 5 there is no appearance. At any rate, no counter affidavit is filed by them and there is no representation for them.

¶51

The fact remains that the petitioner whose land was acquired as early as in the year 1986 is yet to receive the compensation legally due to her. It is for the authorities who acquired the land to see that compensation which is legally found due to her as per the award is paid. About 3 decades passed since the dispossession of petitioner and about 7 years since the award of enhanced compensation was passed, based on which

¶52

she claims payment. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner was illegally deprived of the payment due to her under the award. Since the payment is delayed unnecessarily causing heavy loss to the petitioner who could have usefully and profitably utilised the amount, the petitioner is liable to be compensated. Therefore, the petitioner

¶53

:6:

¶54

W.P.(C) No.8474 of 2011

¶55

will also be entitled to additional interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of filing this writ petition that is from 17.3.2011 till the date on which the entire amount due to her is paid.

¶56

In the above circumstances, there will be a direction to respondents 1 to 3 to see that the amount due under Ext.P7 award for a sum of Rs.4,31,534/- along with a sum of Rs.92,778.7 towards interest for the period from 1.7.2009 till the date of payment is disbursed to the petitioner either by themselves or by attaching properties of respondents 4 and 5.

¶57

The amount due to the petitioner shall carry interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of filing this writ petition till the date of payment. The payment shall be effected within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶58

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶59

Sd/-

¶60

P.V.ASHA JUDGE

¶61

rkc

Lekshmikutty Amma v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lekshmikutty Amma 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Manager, Model Central School Vs the State of Kerala and Others

Suresh M. Vs State of Kerala

Seetharama Kadamannaya Vs the Land Revenue Commissioner and Anr.

V.Velayudhan Chettiar Vs Kseb

Ishabi Vs the District Collector, Thrissur and Ors.

Gopalakrishnan.K Vs Superintendent of Police,Crime Branch