Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Kerala High Court

Madhavi Amma vs State Of Kerala on 26 August, 2009

Author: Pius C. Kuriakose

Bench: Pius C.Kuriakose, K.Surendra Mohan

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

LA.App..No. 1502 of 2008()


1. MADHAVI AMMA
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA
                       ...       Respondent

2. MANAGING DIRECTOR

                For Petitioner  :SRI.N.NAGARESH

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN

 Dated :26/08/2009

 O R D E R
               PIUS C. KURIAKOSE &
              K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.
    ------------------------------------------------
             L. A. A. No.1502 of 2008
    ------------------------------------------------
     Dated this the 26th day of August, 2009

                    JUDGMENT

Pius C. Kuriakose, J The claimant being aggrieved by the award of the Land Acquisition Reference Court is in appeal. Her properties were acquired for the purposes of Industrial Growth Centre of the KSIDC at Pallippuram in Cherthala thaluk. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.7876/- per Are. Under the impugned judgment the same was re-fixed at Rs.9845/- per Are. The main grievance of the appellant/claimant is that in many other cases the value of Rs.7876/- per Are was re-fixed by the Reference Court at Rs.17297/- per Are. Ext.A1 L. A. A. No.1502 of 2008 -2- common judgment in LAR.29/01 is cited in ground 'C' of the appeal as an example.

2. We have heard the submissions of Mr.N.Nagaresh, the learned counsel for the appellant and those of Mr.Krishnankutty Pillai, the learned Standing Counsel for the Requisitioning Authority. We have heard Mr.Basant Balaji, the learned Senior Government Pleader also. It is not disputed either by Mr.Krishnankutty Pillai or by Mr.Basant Balaji that the enhancement of land value from Rs.7876/- to Rs.17297/- per Are was approved not only by this Court but also by the Supreme Court. The Land Acquisition Officer having treated the property under acquisition in this case to be of the same value as the properties in LAR.29/01, we do not find any reason for denying that value to the property of the appellant. L. A. A. No.1502 of 2008 -3- We set aside the judgment and decree under appeal and re-fix the value of the properties under acquisition at Rs.17,297/- per Are.

3. The appeal will stand allowed to the above extent, but in the circumstances, without any order as to costs. It is made clear that the appellant will be entitled for all statutory benefits on the total enhanced compensation to which she becomes eligible by virtue of the re-fixation done under this judgment.

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE K. SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE kns/-