Kerala High Court
Biju vs State Of Kerala on 28 November, 2025
Author: T.R. Ravi
Bench: T.R.Ravi
2025:KER:91844
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA, 1947
OP(C) NO. 1488 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.10.2020 IN I.A.NO.1534 OF
2019 IN LAR NO.2 OF 2016 OF SUB COURT ATTINGAL
CLAIMANT/PETITIONER:
BIJU
AGED 50 YEARS
S/O. IBRAHIM,E.K HOUSE, KURAKKODE, PALLICHAVEETU
MURI, PAILIPPURAM, THONNAKKAL, THONAKKAL P.O. ,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REP.BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY
HOLDER SHYLA.N, AGE 49, W/O. SHIHABUDEEN,
SHIBINA MANZIL, PULLNIVILA, THUNDATHIL P.O,
PATTUVILAKATHU MURI, AYIROOPPARA VILAGE,
MURUKKUMPUZHA- 695 302.
BY ADV SRI.RINU. S. ASWAN
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
CIVIL STATION, KUDAPPANAKKUNNU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN-695043.
2 THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TECHNOPARK, PARK
CENTRE, TECHNOPARK I CAMPUS,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN-695581.
GP SMT. S. L SYLAJA
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28.11.2025,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:91844
OP(C) NO. 1488 OF 2021
2
T.R. RAVI, J.
--------------------------------------------
O.P.(C) No.1488 of 2021
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 28th day of November, 2025
JUDGMENT
The original petition has been filed challenging Ext.P4 order to the extent it relates to the calculation of the compensation payable. The petitioner had filed Ext.P3 pointing out that the method of calculation which had been adopted was wrong and also stating in paragraph 4 the manner in which the calculation ought to have been made. The court below held that there is nothing wrong with the calculations and rejected the petition. The original petition has been filed against the order of rejection.
2. The reference court had refixed the value of the properties relying on the judgment in LAR No.12 of 2010 and other connected matters, at Rs.1,48,200/- per Are. The Land Acquisition Officer had fixed the compensation for the value of 2025:KER:91844 OP(C) NO. 1488 OF 2021 3 structures at Rs.6,94,617/-. An enhancement was granted with regard to the tree value also. However, while passing the order the court below had in paragraph 23 of the judgment, which has been produced as Ext.P2 calculated the compensation in the following manner:
"23. Based on above discussions and by applying the dictum, the land value as well as value of improvements in the acquired land of claimants shall be re-calculated on the basis of the following calculations discussed below:
Acquired land of claimant No.1, Nabeesa Beevi, agent of Biju.
i. Total area acquired= 6.78 Ares ii. Land value fixed by the L.A Officer = 75824/-per Are iii. Land value increased by treating Ext.A2 as exemplar document = Rs.1,48,200/-per Are iv. Total land value 148200 x 6.78 = Rs.1004796/ v. Value of structures Rs.694617/-
[Confirmed valuation of LA. Officer] vi. Value of improvements = 1 coconut tree (height 2025:KER:91844 OP(C) NO. 1488 OF 2021 4 of 10 meters) enhanced = Rs.750/- vii. Total compensation (4+5+6)= 1004796+ 694617+750=1700163/-
viii. 30% solatium on the above compensation = Rs.510048.9/-
ix. Total compensation (7+8) 2210211.9 (rounded to Multiples of ten) Rs.2210220/- x. Amount of compensation received by 1st claimant =Rs.1923475/-.
xi. Balance compensation payable to claimant (9 - 10) = 2210220-1923475= Rs.2,86,745/-"
3. There is an apparent mistake in the above calculation since the solatium has not been properly calculated on the enhancement granted which has resulted in the total compensation also being wrong. It is in the above circumstances that I.A.No.1534 of 2019 was filed. Without properly appreciating the contention the court below has held that there is no mistake.
4. In order to ascertain the correctness, this court had also directed the concerned officer to be present in court. The concerned officer has appeared today and admitted that there is a mistake in the calculation and confirmed that the 2025:KER:91844 OP(C) NO. 1488 OF 2021 5 calculation made in paragraph 4 of the affidavit in support of I.A. No.1534 of 2019 is correct. The officer has also submitted the correct calculation statement which is reproduced below:
CALCULATION STATEMENT (As per Supreme Court order) LAR No : 02/16. of Sub Court, Attingal Name of Requisitioning Authority : Chief Executive Officer, Technopark, Tvpm Date of 4(1) Notification : 05.12.2006 Date of Award : 08.05.2009 Date of Taken Possession : 28.09.2011 Date of judgment & Decree : 30.03.2019 LAA No : Nil Name of claimant : Biju Amount fixed by court per Are : 148200.00 Amount fixed by LAO per Are : 75824.00 Enhancement per Are : 72376.00 Actual enhancement to claimant : 491409.28 490709.28 (land value) + 700 (structural value) Extent Acquired in Ares : 6.78 Date Item Land and Solatium Interest Structural Addl.Land Values Value and Court Cost Enhanced compensation 491409.28 allowed by the Court 30% solatium 147422.78 Additional land value (12% increase from 143141.46 05/12/2006 to 08/05/2009 -
886 days for Rs.491409/-
2025:KER:91844
OP(C) NO. 1488 OF 2021
6
Total 781973.53
9% interest for one year from
28/09/2011 to 27/09/2012 70377.62
for Rs.781974/- (Aggregate
amount)
15% int. from 28/09/2012 to
12/07/2021 3210.00 days for 1031562.34
Rs.781974/-(Aggregate
amount)
Proportionate Court Cost 0
Total 491409.28 290564.25 1101939.96
Amount Deposited vide 'D'
Form Cheque No.
94329 dated 12.07.2021 Rs.891134/- (adjusted towards
: Rs.802021/- interest, cost, principal)")
94329 dated 12.07.2021
Rs.89113/-(Income tax)
Amount Adjusted 0.00 0.00 891134.00
Balance adjusted 491409.28 290564.25 210805.96
Balance Amount to 992779.49
claimant
15% int. from 13/07/2021 to
30/11/2025 1602.00 days for 514817.09
Rs.781974/- (Aggregate
amount)
Balance to be deposited
rounded to 1507597
fifteen lakh seven thousand five hundred and ninety seven only This Court appreciates the action of the officers in helping the Court to arrive at the correct compensation.
2025:KER:91844 OP(C) NO. 1488 OF 2021 7
5. The original petition stands allowed. I.A. No.1534 of 2019 is allowed. The award Ext.P2 shall stand modified in terms of the calculation statement extracted in paragraph 4 and necessary orders shall be issued directing the payment of the compensation as calculated therein. The orders shall be issued within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
T.R.RAVI JUDGE mpm 2025:KER:91844 OP(C) NO. 1488 OF 2021 8 APPENDIX OF OP(C) NO. 1488 OF 2021 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FORM NO.15 ISSUED BY SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), TRIVANDRUM DATED 08.05.2009.
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN L.A.R 2 OF 2016 ON THE FILES OF THE HON'BLE SUB COURT, ATTINGAL DATED 30.03.2019.
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE I.A NO.1534 OF 2019 IN L.A.R NO.02 OF 2016 ON THE FILES OF HON'BLE SUB COURT, ATTINGAL.
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A NO. 1534 OF 2019 IN L.A.R NO.02 OF 2016 ON THE FILES OF THE HON'BLE SUB COURT, ATTINGAL DATED 19.10.2020.