S.Mrithyunjayan vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 21019 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
                               &
               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU
 MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 19TH ASWINA, 1943
                    LA.APP. NO. 376 OF 2016
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN LAR 34/2010 OF PRINCIPAL
                   SUB COURT,KOLLAM, KOLLAM
APPELLANT:

          S.MRITHYUNJAYAN
          AGED 80 YEARS
          S/O. SEKHARAN, JAYAS, WEST WARD, MUNDAKKAL,
          KOLLAM.
          BY ADVS.
          SMT.SREEDEVI KYLASANATH
          SRI.ACHUTH KYLAS
          SRI.JOSELAL GEORGE
          SMT.KAMALAKSHY KYLASANATH


RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM-
          691001.
    2     THE SECRETARY
          KOLLAM CORPORATION, KOLLAM-01.
          BY ADV.M.K. CHANDRA MOHAN, SC.
          ADV.DEEPA V., SPL.GP.
THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 11.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 L.A.A.No.376 OF 2016             2



                          JUDGMENT

Anil K. Narendran, J.

The appellant has filed this appeal under Section 54 of the

Land Acquisition Act, 1894, seeking enhancement of the land

value fixed by the Reference Court, i.e., the Principal Sub Court,

Kollam, in L.A.R.No.34 of 2010 in its common judgment dated

15.09.2015 in L.A.R.Nos.34, 40 and 41 of 2010. The property

in question having an extent of 10.95 Ares comprised in

Sy.No.115/51 of Mundakkal Village was acquired for the

purpose of rehabilitation of people occupying slum area, at the

requisition of Kollam Corporation. Section 4(1) notification was

published on 08.01.2008. The land was taken possession on

02.11.2009. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded

Rs.7,92,502/- as compensation, fixing land value at

Rs.51,822/- per Are. Dissatisfied with the compensation, the

claimant sought for reference under Section 18 of the Act,

which was numbered as L.A.R.No.34 of 2010. Before the

Reference Court, the claimant filed statement claiming land

value at the rate of Rs.12,00,000/- per Are. L.A.R.No.34 of

2010 was tried along with L.A.R.Nos.40 and 41 of 2010.

2. Before the Reference Court, the appellant/claimant

was examined as AW1 and Exts.A1 to A6 were marked on the

side of the claimant. The report and the rough plan of the

Advocate Commissioner were marked as Exts.C1 and C2.

Exts.X1 to X4 were marked on the side of the respondents.

3. After considering the pleadings and materials on

record, the Reference Court by the common judgment and

decree dated 15.09.2015 re-fixed the land value of the acquired

land as Rs.88,097.04/- with statutory benefits. Feeling

aggrieved, the appellant/claimant is before this Court in this

appeal.

4. This appeal was filed along with C.M.Appl.No.567 of

2016, seeking condonation of delay of 62 days in re-presenting

the appeal, after curing the defects. By the order dated

16.11.2016, that C.M.Application was allowed. Thereafter, by

the order dated 18.11.2016 in C.M.Appl.No.586 of 2016, the

filing delay of 235 days was condoned, without imposing any

conditions.

5. On 18.11.2016, this Court admitted the appeal on

file. The learned Government Pleader took notice for the 1 st

respondent and the learned Standing Counsel for Kollam

Corporation took notice for the 2nd respondent. The

appellant/claimant has paid the balance court fee.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant/claimant,

the learned Special Government Pleader for the 1st respondent

State and also the learned Standing Counsel for the 2 nd

respondent Corporation.

7. Today, when this case is taken up for consideration

along with L.A.A.Nos.54 and 55 of 2018, arising out of

L.A.R.Nos.40 and 41 of 2010, the learned counsel for the

appellant would point out that a common judgment dated

28.01.2016 in L.A.R.Nos.39, 53 and 98 of 2010 of the Principal

Sub Court, Kollam, a certified copy of which is placed on record

along with I.A.No.1 of 2021 in this appeal, as Ext.A7. The

learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the

properties involved in that case are also lying in the very same

survey number, which are similarly situated, which were

acquired for the very same purpose and those properties are

granted a considerably higher compensation.

8. The learned Special Government Pleader would

submit that, though the property covered by the common

judgment dated 28.01.2016 of the Reference Court in

L.A.R.Nos.39, 53 and 98 of 2010, which is placed on record as

Ext.A7 in this appeal, and the acquired land in this appeal are

adjacent lands, which are similarly situated, which were

acquired for the very same purpose under the very same

Section 4(1) notification, there is some mistake in paragraph 18

of that judgment, while calculating 30% of the fair value fixed

by the Revenue Divisional Officer under Section 28A of the

Kerala Stamp Act. If 30% of the fair value of Rs.2,47,000/-,

i.e., 74,000/- is added, the land value of the acquired land in

this appeal can be re-fixed as Rs.1,72,900/- per Are.

9. The learned counsel for the appellant/claimant would

submit that, as pointed out by the learned Special Government

Pleader, the re-fixation of land value of the acquired land,

relying on the aforesaid judgment of the Reference Court, can

only be at Rs.1,72,900/- per Are.

In such circumstances, this appeal is disposed of by re-

fixing the land value for the acquired land, having an extent of

10.95 Ares comprised in Sy.No.115/51 of Mundakkal Village, at

the rate of Rs.1,72,900/- per Are. The appellant/claimant will

be entitled to additional compensation, in view of the re-fixation

of land value as above, together with all statutory benefits

admissible under Section 23(2), Section 23(1A) and Section 28

of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

Sd/-

ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE

Sd/-

K. BABU JUDGE

yd

APPENDIX APPELLANT'S EXHIBIT:

Exhibit A7 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN LAR NOS.39, 53 AND 98 OF 2010 OF THE PRINCIPAL SUB JUDGE, KOLLAM WITH LEGIBLE COPY.