Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member Services -- Sign up today and get free trial for one month.
Kerala High Court
Seena Emmanuel vs Union Of India on 21 May, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 31ST VAISAKHA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 34638 OF 2023
PETITIONER
SEENA EMMANUEL,AGED 58 YEARS
W/O EMMANUEL THOMAS, KAPPIL HOUSE,
KARIMBA P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678597
BY ADVS.MANU VYASAN PETER
P.B.SUBRAMANYAN,P.B.KRISHNAN
SABU GEORGE,B.ANUSREE
RESPONDENTS:
1 UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS TRANSPORT BHAVAN 1,
PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001
2 NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA (NHAI)
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT, PALAKKAD,
ARMUGHAM COLONY, CHANDRA NAGAR, PALAKKAD
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROJECT DIRECTOR, PIN - 678007
3 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORK DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
4 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
COLLECTORATE, KUNNATHURMEDU, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678013
5 SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LA NH)
COMPETENT AUTHORITY FOR LAND ACQUISITION (CALA),
GREENFIELD NATIONAL HIGHWAY,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678001
BY ADV KRISHNA T C
OTHER PRESENT:
GP - DEEPA V.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21.05.2024,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.34638 of 2023 2
VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
.................................................................
W.P.(C) No.34638 of 2023
.................................................................
Dated this the 21st day of May, 2024
JUDGMENT
Petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P4 BVR and for a direction to the respondents to include an additional category of property with National Highway access in the Basis Valuation Report of Karimba-1 Village, Mannarkkad Taluk for the purpose of acquisition in respect of National Highway 966 (Greenfield).
2. It is averred that the petitioner is the absolute owner of 5.68 acres of land comprised in survey nos.173, 170/1A 1, 170/1A2, 176/2A and 176/2B of Karimba-I Village in Mannarkkad Taluk of Palakkad District, which is obtained as per Ext.P1 settlement deed. The property situated on the western side of the petitioner's property is owned by her husband, which was obtained as per Ext.P2 sale deed. The contention of the petitioner is that both the properties are lying contiguously as a compact plot and in the absolute possession and enjoyment of the petitioner and her husband. Ext.P4 BVR was prepared in respect of Karimba-1 Village wherein only four categories of properties were shown. The specific contention of the petitioner is that in Ext.P4 BVR there is no category prescribed as property WP(C) No.34638 of 2023 3 which has got access to the National Highway, whereas in respect of other Villages, as evident from Ext.P5, an additional category has been prescribed as 'Category E Wetland-Nilam with NH road access'. The contention of the petitioner is that the property of the petitioner is also having National Highway access and since such a category has not been provided in Ext.P4 BVR, petitioner is put to serious prejudice. It is in the said circumstances that the petitioner has approached this Court.
3. The learned Government Pleader upon instructions submitted that since the award has already been passed, the remedy available to the petitioner is to approach the Arbitrator under Section 3G of the National Highways Act, 1956.
4. Petitioner relies on the judgment in Lillykutty v. State of Kerala, 2012 KHC 751 and contend that while determining compensation, if the properties of the husband and wife are lying together contiguously and that the husband and wife are enjoying the properties as common holding of the family, it should be included in one and the same category for fixation of compensation. The contention of the petitioner is that the same has not been done in the present case. Petitioner submits that since award has already been passed she may be permitted to raise all these contentions before the Arbitrator and a direction may be issued to the Arbitrator to consider the grievance raised by the petitioner regarding WP(C) No.34638 of 2023 4 Ext.P4 BVR wherein no category has been provided for properties having National Highway access.
Therefore, it is ordered that if the petitioner approaches the Arbitrator and raise all these contentions including the objection regarding Ext.P4 BVR, the Arbitrator shall make necessary enquiry as to whether the property is having National Highway access and as to whether the benefit of the judgment of this Court in Lillykutty's case cited supra could be extended to the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon dehors the fact that in Ext.P4 BVR no such category has been provided as property having access to the National Highway.
With the abovesaid direction the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE cks WP(C) No.34638 of 2023 5 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 34638/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF SETTLEMENT DEED NO. 7219 OF 2006 OF SRO MANNARKKAD DATED 23.11.2006 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 5288 OF 2003 OF SRO MANNARKKAD DATED 09.10.2003 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE SURVEY-SKETCH OF THE PROPERTY PREPARED BY LAND SURVEYOR Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO. B1-
411/2023 OF THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LA NH)
AND CALA, PALAKKAD DATED 20.05.2023
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO. B1-
411/2023 OF THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LA NH)
AND CALA, PALAKKAD DATED 07.06.2023