Allowed

Cochin Devaswom Board v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC4 Jul 2018WP(C)/25949/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition and a designated bankruptcy application challenging a government order on compensation. The Court upheld the Ombudsman's valuation over a committeeﬂnding, directed payment of ﬂfty lakh balance compensation for 14.970 cents of land, and rejected a claim for an additional 51 cents.

What did the court decide?

Directed Government to pay Rs. 50,00,000 balance compensation for 14.970 cents within two months and compute additional amount for balance 1.065 cents within three months; Writ Petition and D.B.A. dis

Cochin Devaswom Board Vs the State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶5

WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1940

¶6

WP(C).No. 25949 of 2014

¶7

PETITIONER

¶8

COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, THRISSUR.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.K.P.SUDHEER, SC, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOA

¶10

SRI.KRISHNA MENON, SC, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

THE STATE OF KERALA

¶13

REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1.

¶14

VYTILLA MOBILITY HUB SOCIETY (VMHS)

¶15

SOUTH KANIYAMPUZHA ROAD, KOCHI-19, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶16

THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION) KOCHI CORPORATION, VYTILLA, KOCHI-19.

¶17

VYTILLA SREE SIVA SUBRAHMANIA

¶18

KSHETRA UPADESAKA SAMITHIY, VYTILLA, KOCHI-19,

¶19

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶20

R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.AJAY

¶21

R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.R.RAJKUMAR R2 BY ADV. SRI.V.P.PRASAD

¶22

BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.ANANTHA KRISHNAN

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22.05.2018 ALONG WITH D.B.A.NO.18 OF 2012, THE COURT ON 04.07.2018 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 & D.B.A.No.18 of 2012 2

¶25

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶26

PRESENT:

¶27

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶28

WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1940

¶29

DBA.No. 18 of 2012

¶30

(IN THE MATTER OF COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD – ACQUISITION OF 19 CENTS OF DEVASWOM PROPERTY IN SURVEY NO.731/3 OF POONITHURA VILLAGE – NONPAYMENT OF COMPENSATION FOR THE LAND)

¶31

APPLICANT

¶32

COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR REP. BY THE SECRETARY

¶33

BY ADVS.SRI.N.RAGHURAJ,SC,COCHIN DEVASWOM

¶34

BOARD

¶35

SRI.KRISHNA MENON, SC, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD

¶36

RESPONDENT:

¶37

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, LOCAL FUND AUDIT (COCHIN DEVASWOM) THRISSUR.

¶38

VYTTILLA SREE SIVA SUBRAMANIA KSHETHRA UPADESHAKA SAMITHI, VYTTILLA P.O., KOCHI – 682 019, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶39

VYTTILLA MOBILITY HUB SOCIETY (VHMS), SOUTH KANIYAMPUZHA ROAD, COCHIN – 682 019, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶40

THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION), KOCHI CORPORATION, VYTTILA – 19.

¶41

KERAFED, CENTRAL RANGE, VYTTILLA P.O., COCHIN – 682 019, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER.

¶42

THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶43

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 & D.B.A.No.18 of 2012 3

¶44

R5 BY ADV. SRI.MOHAMMED SHIRAZ,SC, KERAFED R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.M.SANAL R5 BY ADV. SRI.T.S.KRISHNA KUMAR, SC, KERAFED R3 BY ADV. SRI.M.AJAY R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.R.RAJKUMAR R3 BY ADV. SRI.V.P.PRASAD R1 & 6 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.ANANTHA KRISHNAN

¶45

THIS DEVASWOM BOARD APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22-052018 ALONG WITH W.P.C.NO.25949 OF 2014, THE COURT ON 04-07-2018 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶46

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶47

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012

¶48

¶49

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON &

¶50

R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, JJ.

¶51

************************** W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶52

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012

¶53

Dated this the 4^th day of July 2018

¶54

JUDGMENT

¶55

R.Narayana Pisharadi,J

¶56

The Vyttila Siva Subrahmania Temple is a temple under

¶57

the Cochin Devaswom Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the

¶58

Board'). A portion of the land in front of the temple comprised in Sy.No.731/3 of Poonithura Village was taken over for the construction and use of Vyttila Mobility Hub.

¶59

DBA No.18 of 2012 relates to acquisition of land belonging

¶60

to the Board for the Hub and payment of compensation to

¶61

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012 5

¶62

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶63

the Board in respect of that land. W.P(C) No. 25949 of 2014 is filed by the Board in the same matter.

¶64

The material averments in the writ petition can be briefly stated as follows: The Vyttila Siva Subrahmania Temple is the owner of 59 cents of land comprised in Sy.No.731/3 of the Poonithura Village. Out of the 59 cents, 19 cents of land was given on lease to the Agricultural Department which owned a coconut farm in the adjacent property. Later, the farm along with the aforesaid 19 cents of land came into the possession of KERAFED and it constructed a compound wall enclosing the 19 cents of land. Subsequently, a proposal to establish a bus terminal at Vyttila was mooted. The Temple Upadesaka Samithy gave a representation on 21.08.2009 to the Devaswom Ombudsman (hereinafter referred to as 'the Ombudsman') against acquisition of the 19 cents of land for that project. Learned Ombudsman submitted a report before this Court as

¶65

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012 6

¶66

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶67

CDB Report No.112 of 2009 dated 07.09.2009 and it was numbered as D.B.P.No.44 of 2009 by this Court. On 07.09.2010, this Court closed D.B.P.No.44 of 2009 by recording the statement of KERAFED that it was prepared to give back the property to the Board subject to identification of the property and payment of the value of the improvements to it.

¶68

On 15.03.2011, the Special Tahsildar (Land

¶69

Acquisition) gave notice to the Board to give consent for taking possession of its land in Sy.No.731/3. As per the resolution dated 18.07.2011, the Board decided to release 19 cents of land for the use of the Vyttila Mobility Hub Society (hereinafter referred to as 'the Society') and to seek payment of the market value for the property. On 10.02.2012, the Board filed D.B.A.No.18 of 2012 before this Court to issue direction to the Society to pay compensation to the Board for the 19 cents of land acquired for the

¶70

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012 7

¶71

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶72

purpose of Vyttila Bus Terminal. As per the order dated 08.08.2012 in D.B.A.No.18 of 2012, this Court directed all parties to place relevant materials before the learned Ombudsman and also directed the learned Ombudsman to file a report regarding the amount of compensation payable to the Board for the land.

¶73

The learned Ombudsman filed Ext.P3 report dated 24.09.2012 before this Court. The learned Ombudsman found that only 14.97 cents of land belonging to the Board was occupied by the Vyttila Mobility Hub. The learned Ombudsman also suggested that a total amount of two crores rupees may be paid as compensation to the Board for the land acquired. As per order dated 21.11.2012 in D.B.A.No.18 of 2012, this Court directed the Government to initially release 1.5 crores rupees to the Board subject to settlement of the total amount of compensation later. This amount was paid to the Board. Thereafter, the Board filed

¶74

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012 8

¶75

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶76

Ext.P5 claim statement in D.B.A.No.18 of 2012 claiming that another 51 cents of land which belonged to the Board has been put to use by the Society and that the Board is entitled to get compensation for this land also. In the counter affidavit filed in D.B.A.No.18 of 2012 by the Society to Ext.P5 claim statement made by the Board, it admitted that 16.035 cents of land which belonged to the Board was taken over by it for its use (as against 14.90 cents of land admitted by it earlier) and that it was ready to pay additional compensation of Rs.11,44,278/- to the Board for the additional extent of land which was found to be taken by it for its use. As per Ext.P7 order dated 25.11.2013 in D.B.A.No.18 of 2012, this Court appointed a High Power Committee (hereinafter referred to as 'the Committee') and directed it to decide the actual extent of land taken over from the Board and the amount of compensation payable to the Board.

¶77

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶78

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012

¶79

¶80

The Government have issued Ext.P10 order

¶81

incorporating the suggestions and findings made by the Committee. The conclusions reached by the Committee, as revealed from Ext.P10 order, are the following:

¶82

“1. There is preponderance of recordical evidence to show that the land in Sy.No.731/6 is puramboke land. In fact, the village office Vyttila functioned from this land till it was shifted to another location, recently.

¶83

2. As far as the land ownership records are concerned, Revenue Department is authorized to maintain the same. If any other agency (in this case CDB) produces contradictory records, that record has to be seen in the context of the Revenue records. Since there is preponderance of documentary evidence to show that the said land is Sy.No.731/6 is puramboke land, the same is to be accepted.

¶84

3. Regarding the extent of land of CDB transferred to VMHS, the same is arrived at based on the field verification and hence it may be accepted. VMHS may pay the balance amount payable to the CDB at the rate agreed to by VMHS before the Ombudsman.”

¶85

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶86

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012

¶87

¶88

The Board has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P10 order issued by the Government. The reliefs sought in this writ petition are the following:

¶89

“i) Call for the records leading to Ext.P10 order and quash the same by the issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction.

¶90

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents 1 and 2 to pay compensation for the land in Sy.No.731/3 of Poonithura village acquired for the 2^nd respondent at the rate of Rs.37,00,000/- per cent.

¶91

Iii) Issue a writ or mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1^st respondent to consider the claim of the Board for compensation for the land in Sy.No.731/6 of Poonithura village that had been acquired for the 2^nd respondent.

¶92

iv) Issue any other appropriate writ order or direction that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶93

The respondents have not filed any counter affidavit

¶94

in the writ petition.

¶95

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶96

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012

¶97

¶98

We have heard Sri.T.K.Anantha Krishnan, learned

¶99

Senior Government Pleader and also Sri.K.P.Sudheer, learned Standing Counsel for the Board.

¶100

Regarding the compensation payable to the Board for the land comprised in Survey No.731/3 which was transferred to the Society, the Committee has not made any specific suggestion or finding based on any materials. The suggestion made by the Committee in this regard reads as follows:

¶101

“ 3. Regarding the extent of land of CDB transferred to VMHS, the same is arrived at based on the field verification and hence it may be accepted. VMHS may pay the balance amount payable to the CDB at the rate agreed to by VMHS before the Ombudsman.”

¶102

The aforesaid suggestion regarding payment of

¶103

compensation for the land is not based on any materials.

¶104

The suggestion made by the Committee is merely based on

¶105

the stand taken by the Society before the learned Ombudsman that it is agreeable to pay compensation of one

¶106

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012 12

¶107

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶108

crore and fifty lakhs rupees. There was no agreement or understanding made between the Society and the Board before the learned Ombudsman regarding the compensation

¶109

payable for the land comprised in Survey No.731/3.

¶110

On the other hand, the suggestion made by the learned Ombudsman regarding the amount of compensation payable by the Society in respect of the land comprised in Survey No.731/3 is based on proper materials. The relevant

¶111

portion of Ext.P3 report filed by the learned Ombudsman reads as follows:

¶112

“3. The other aspect to be considered is with respect to compensation payable to the Devaswom Board. According to the District Collector, the land value is fixed at Rs.11,33,720/- per Are on the basis of document No.1339/2011 SRO Maradu by giving 30% increase in the value shown in the document. For purpose of negotiation, it was increased to Rs.16,09,882/- per Are rounded to Rupees One crore. It works out to Rs.6,60,000/- per cent. The Temple Advisory Committee has produced two

¶113

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012

documents.

4. The Devaswom Board had decided on 15-62011 to allow it's land to be used for Mobility Hub on payment of compensation. One of the documents produced is dated 29.11.2007 as per which 27.370 cents were sold for Rs.7,21,98,400/-. It works out to Rs.26,00,000/- per cent. The other document is dated 3.7.2007 and as per that 1.59 acres was sold for Rs.33,70,29,216 and it works out to Rs.21,00,000/- per cent. An average of all these will be Rs.17,60,000/- lakhs per cent.

¶118

5. On behalf of Mobility Hub, an offer of additional 50,00,000/- was made in which case it will work out to Rs.10,00,000/- per cent and immediate payment is also offered.

¶119

6. On behalf of the Devaswom Board, it can be contended that the documents produced by the Temple Advisory Committee are of the year 2007 and the land of the Devaswom Board is taken in 2011 and there is definitely increase in market value. The location of the land near Vyttila Junction which is an important commercial junction and the market value will definitely be more than the value shown in the two documents. On behalf of the Mobility Hub, it can be argued that if Land Acquisition proceedings were adopted, it would have taken years to settle the

¶120

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶121

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012

¶122

¶123

dispute and fix land value and instead of that ready payment is made and the purpose of take over is a public purpose and the Devaswom Board should also co-operate with such ventures. The document relied on by them is of the year 2011, but the other particulars and location of the land is not known. The fair value fixed by the Government in this area for the purpose of registration of documents is a minimum of Rs.3,60,000/- per cent.

¶124

It is for the Hon'ble High Court to finally decide the amount to be fixed. If another fifty lakhs is also asked for from the present offer it will be a total of two crores and it will work out to Rs.13,00,000/- per cent which appears to be reasonable in the context. Even this is far below the average value of Rs.17,60,000/- lakhs per cent and is without taking into account any solatium or interest. If this suggestion is accepted, the Mobility Hub will have to pay rupees two crores to the Board in the place of original offer of one crore and the subsequent offer of Rs.1.50 crores.”

¶125

It can be seen from the above that the amount of compensation payable by the Society to the Board is suggested by the learned Ombudsman based on the

¶126

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012 15

¶127

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶128

documents produced by them relating to sale of property in the locality. Even the compensation suggested by the learned Ombudsman at the rate of 13 lakhs rupees per cent is far below the average market value of 17 lakhs rupees per cent for the property in the locality and it also does not include any interest or solatium. At the same time, the Board has to give some concession by taking into account the fact that the land was taken over by the Society for a public purpose. In these circumstances, the amount of compensation of two crores rupees suggested by the learned Ombudsman for the land having an extent of 14.970 cents appears to be just and reasonable. We are inclined to award that amount as compensation to the Board for that extent of land.

¶129

Later, it has been conceded by the Society that the total extent of land comprised in Survey No.731/3 taken over by it is not 14.970 cents but it is 16.035 cents. The

¶130

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012

¶131

¶132

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶133

amount of two crores rupees being awarded as compensation is for 14.970 cents of land and not for 16.035 cents. Therefore, the Society is liable to pay compensation for the balance extent of 1.065 cents of land at the same rate.

¶134

Regarding the claim made by the Board for compensation for 51 cents of land, it is to be noted that such a claim was made by it for the first time only in the month of September, 2013 as per Ext.P5 claim statement. The claim of the Board is based on the ground that 51 cents of land belonged to it, which was earlier comprised in Sy.No.731/3, was taken over by the Government without its consent. The claim made by the Board in Ext.P5 claim statement in this regard reads as follows:

¶135

“The properties in Sy.Nos.731/1 to 731/4 were owned by the Vyttila Devaswom as per the Settlement Register of Poonithura Village which was prepared on 19.3.1081 ME, calender year being

¶136

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶137

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012

¶138

¶139

1906. A copy of the Settlement Register relating to Sy.Nos.731/1 to 731/4 is produced herewith and marked as Annexure-A. It is submitted that the Thanathu register of the properties belonging to the Board describes the extent of property in Sy.No.731/3 as 59 cents. A copy of the relevant page of the Thanath register is produced herewith and marked as Annexure-B. Out of these 59 cents, 19 cents had been given on licence to the Agricultural Department for running a coconut farm at Vyttila. The property in Sy.No.731/1 and 731/2 had been assigned to various individuals on coming into force of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. It is submitted that sub-division No.2 had been subsequently renumbered as 2, 7 and 8.

¶140

3. It is submitted that about 20 cents on the southern side from Sy.No.731/3 had been taken by the Government for the Poonithura Village Office without the consent of the Board. The Village Authority had thereupon unauthorisedly and illegally given this property a new sub-division number. It is submitted that this property which was unauthorisedly taken by the Government for the Village office has been handed over to the mobility Hub and it is used by it as an exit way. Likewise the property having an extent of 11.38 Ares (28 cents)

¶141

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶142

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012 18

¶143

which belonged to the Board was transferred unauthorisedly and illegally as puramboke land by the Revenue Authorities without the consent, knowledge and notice of the Board or any of the Devaswom Authorities. This property is also now used and occupied by the Mobility Hub. Thus a total extent of 51 cents is in the possession and use of the mobility hub.”

¶144

There is no real basis for the aforesaid claim made

¶145

by the Board. It has already been found that the extent of land taken over by the Society for Vyttila Mobility Hub is 16.035 cents and therefore, the claim of the Board that 19 cents of land was transferred to Agricultural Department and thereafter it was transferred to the Society cannot be accepted. Likewise, there is also no basis for the claim made by the Board that the property having an extent of 11.38 Ares (28 cents) which belonged to it was unauthorisedly and illegally transferred for the use of the Mobility Hub without the consent of the Board.

¶146

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶147

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012 19

¶148

The Board relies upon Annexures A to D documents produced by it in D.B.A.No.18 of 12 along with Ext.P5 claim statement to contend that 59 cents of property in Sy.No.731/3 belonged to it. Annexure A is the copy of the settlement register. It shows that 56 cents of land in Sy.No.731/3 of Poonithura Village belonged to Vyttila Devaswom. But, it is to be noted that this settlement register is dated 19^th Thulam 1081 (Malayalam Era), that is, more than 110 years ago. Annexure B document is copy of the Tanathu register kept by the Board. It is a self-serving document and it cannot be given preference to the survey records and it cannot be relied upon for any purpose. Annexure C is the copy of the field map in respect of the property comprised in Sy.No.731/3. Annexure D is the copy of the basic tax register. The extent of property comprised in Sy.No.731/3 is shown in Annexure D as 14 Ares and 97 sq.metres and it is also shown that it belongs to the Vyttila

¶149

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012 20

¶150

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶151

Devaswom. Presumably, the entries made in this document are based on the entries made in Annexure A document.

¶152

The Government have produced in DBA No.18 of 12 the sketch prepared by the Taluk Surveyor of the property which belonged to the Board and which was taken over for the purpose of Vyttila Mobility Hub. It shows that only 16.035 cents of land in Sy.No.731/3 is in the possession of the Society.

¶153

Ext.P10 order reveals that the District Collector, Ernakulam produced before the Committee the relevant survey records which showed that in the year 1095 (Malayalam Era), that is 98 years ago, a portion of the land comprised in Sy.No.731/3 was taken over and Poonithura Village Office building was constructed there and then it was given a new sub division number as 731/6. There is no material produced by the Board to show that the aforesaid land was taken from its possession

¶154

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶155

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012 21

¶156

in the year 1095 (Malayalam Era) illegally and unauthorisedly. The claim of the Board is now with regard to the land which was taken over from its possession about 98 years ago.

¶157

In the aforesaid circumstances, we are inclined to accept the finding of the Committee that the Board is entitled to get compensation only for 16.035 cents of land which was taken over from it for the purpose of Vyttila Mobility Hub. We do not find any reason to accept the claim of the Board that it is entitled to get compensation for an additional extent of 51 cents of land.

¶158

Consequently, we direct the Government to pay the balance amount of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees fifty lakhs only) payable as compensation to the Board for the land having an extent of 14.970 cents taken over from its possession. This amount shall be paid within two months from the date of

¶159

this judgment. We also direct that the amount of

¶160

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012 22

¶161

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶162

compensation payable to the Board for the balance extent of 1.065 cents of land taken over from its possession shall be computed at the same rate as in the case of 14.970 cents of land and the same shall be paid to the Board within a period of three months from the date of this judgment. On payment of the amount to the Board, the Society or the Government is at liberty to approach this Court for granting permission to transfer the ownership of the aforesaid land by making necessary entries in the survey records. The writ petition and D.B.A. No.18 of 2012 are disposed of accordingly. No costs.

¶163

(sd/-)

¶164

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE

¶165

(sd/-)

¶166

R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, JUDGE

¶167

jsr

¶168

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 &

¶169

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012

¶170

¶171

WP(C).No. 25949 of 2014 (P)

¶172

APPENDIX

¶173

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶174

EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT NO.112/2009.

¶175

EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT.7-9-2010 IN DBP 44/2009.

¶176

EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE CDB REPORT NO.159/12.

¶177

EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DT.21-11-2012 IN DBA 18/2012.

¶178

EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE CLAIM STATEMENT FILED IN DBA 18/12.

¶179

EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE R2 TO THE CLAIM STATEMENT OF THE BOARD.

¶180

EXHIBIT P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT.25-11-2013 IN DBA 18/12.

¶181

EXHIBIT P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT.19-12-2013 IN DBA 18/2012.

¶182

EXHIBIT P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL CLAIM STATEMENT FILED BY THE BOARD.

¶183

EXHIBIT P10 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT.19-5-2014.

¶184

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :

¶185

NIL

¶186

W.P.(C) No.25949 of 2014 & D.B.A.No.18 of 2012

¶187

¶188

D.B.A.No.18 of 2012

¶189

APPENDIX

¶190

ANNEXURES OF PETITIONER

¶191

ANNEXURE 1 : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CDB REPORT WITHOUT ANNEXURES NO. OF 112/09 DATED 07.09.2009.

¶192

ANNEXURE II : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17.09.2009 IN D.B.P.NO.44 OF 2009.

¶193

ANNEXURE III: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 07.09.2010 IN D.B.P.NO.44 OF 2009.

¶194

ANNEXURE IV: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER BEARING NO.C-873/10 DATED 15.03.2011. ANNEXURE V: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 22.3.2011. ANNEXURE VI: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DECISION OF THE APPLICANT BOARD BEARING NO.R4657/11 DATED 18.07.2011.

¶195

ANNEXURE VII: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER NO.R.4657/11 DATED 18.07.2011.

¶196

ANNEXURE VIII: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REMINDER DATED 12.01.2012.

¶197

ANNEXURE A: TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT REGISTER OF POONITHURA VILLAGE RELATING TO SY.NOS.731/1 TO 731/4.

¶198

ANNEXURE B: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE THANATH REGISTER.

¶199

ANNEXURE C: TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH OF THE FIELD NO.731.

¶200

ANNEXURE D:TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX REGISTER RELATING TO SY.NOS.731/1 TO 5.