Sulochana Ramakrishnan vs Union Of India
2021 Latest Caselaw 21263 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 7TH KARTHIKA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 20109 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          SULOCHANA RAMAKRISHNAN ,
          AGED 82 YEARS
          W/O. LATE MULANGIL RAMAKRISHNAN, P.O. KUZHIMBRAM,
          VALAPPAD, THRISSUR-680568.

          BY ADVS.
          P.RAMAKRISHNAN
          PREETHI RAMAKRISHNAN (P-212)
          ASHA K.SHENOY
          C.ANIL KUMAR



RESPONDENTS:

    1     UNION OF INDIA,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF ROAD
          TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS, NEW DELHI-110001.

    2     THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
          THRISSUR, CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR-680003.

    3     THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY (LA),
          NH NO.66, KODUNGALLUR P.O., THRISSUR-680664.

    4     THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
          L.A., NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, VII/511 B, NEITHELI
          MAVELIPURAM ROAD, MAVELIPURAM, KAKKANAD, KOCHI-682030.

    5     M.R. JOSHY,
          S/O. MULANGIL RAMAKRISHNAN, PADINJARE VEMBALLOOR P.O.,
          THRISSUR-680071.

    6     M.R. SURESH KUMAR,
          S/O. MULANGIL RAMAKRISHNAN, KOZHIMBRAM P.O., CHAVAKKAD,
          THRISSUR-680568.

          BY ADVS.
          JAYASREE K.P.
          JOHN JOSEPH
 WP(C) NO. 20109 OF 2021
                                 2

          BABU P.P.


          SRI.MATHEWS K.PHILIP - SC

           SMT K.AMMINIKKUTTY,   SR. GP




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
29.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 20109 OF 2021
                                         3



                                   JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who is an octogenarian,

says that she is depending on the income

derived from her property, which is now being

acquired for the purpose of the National

Highway Authority of India (NHAI). She says

that even though she is entitled to 50% of the

compensation determined, the competent

Authorities are refusing to release the same to

her on account of certain objections stated to

have been raised by her sons, namely

respondents 5 and 6.

2. The petitioner says that even going by

the claim now made by respondents 5 and 6 -

which is reflected in a civil suit filed by

them - they can only claim 50% and no more of

the value of the property. The petitioner,

therefore, prays that the 3rd respondent -

Competent Authority for Land Acquisition WP(C) NO. 20109 OF 2021

(CALA), be directed to disburse to her half of

the compensation, determined as value of the

acquired properties and to deposit the balance

half in the competent Court, for disbursement,

which can be done only subject to the final

decree in O.S.No.114/2019, which is now pending

before the Sub Court, Chavakkad.

3. The afore submissions of Smt.Preethy

Ramakrishnan, made on behalf of the petitioner,

were opposed by Smt.Jayasree K.P. - learned

counsel appearing for respondents 5 and 6,

relying on a counter affidavit filed by her

clients. However, pertinently, the averments in

the counter affidavit does not even

whisperingly say that the afore respondents

have raised a claim over the property or the

compensation payable against it, in excess of

50%. I, therefore, asked Smt.Jayasree K.P.

whether her clients have raised any claim other

than half over the property, to which, her WP(C) NO. 20109 OF 2021

answer was to the negative.

4. I am, therefore, of the firm view that

the petitioner is justified in seeking relief

and that this Writ Petition deserves to be

allowed.

5. Smt.K.Amminikutty - learned Senior

Government Pleader, appearing for the CALA,

submitted that since the amount of compensation

has already been determined under Section 3E of

the National Highways Act, the 3rd respondent

has no objection in disbursing it in terms of

law; but that he is now incapacitated because

of the internecine disputes raised by the

parties.

In the afore perspective, I order this writ

petition and direct the 3rd respondent to

immediately disburse 50% of the compensation

determined, with respect to the property

covered by Exts.P1 to P3, to the petitioner

within a period of one month from the date of WP(C) NO. 20109 OF 2021

receipt of a copy of this judgment; while, the

balance 50% shall be deposited by the said

Authority in terms of the National Highways

Act, before the competent Court, so that it can

be disbursed subject to the final judgment and

decree in O.S.No.114/2019, pending on the files

of the Sub Court, Chavakkad.

Sd/-

RR/SAS DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

JUDGE WP(C) NO. 20109 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20109/2021 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF TITLE DEED DATED 10/06/1970 IN RESPECT OF 4.40 ARES OF LAND IN SY. NO.591/13 OF VALAPPAD VILLAGE.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF TITLE DEED DATED 10/06/1970 IN RESPECT OF 4.70 ARES OF LAND IN SY. NO.591/13 B OF VALAPPAD VILLAGE.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF TITLE DEED DATED 10/10/1988 IN RESPECT OF 9 ARES OF LAND IN SY. NO.591/14, 591/15 AND 591/12 OF VALAPPAD VILLAGE.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF PLAINT IN OS NO.114/2019 ON THE FILES OF THE SUB COURT, CHAVAKKAD.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF IA NO.1233/2019 IN OS NO.114/2019 FILED BY RESPONDENT 5 AND 6.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT EXTRACT FROM THE NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED UNDER SECTION 3G(3) IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 10/08/2020.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT EXTRACT OF NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED UNDER SECTION 3G (3) IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY OF 30/10/2020.

Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 11/06/2021 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 25/08/2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS

Exhibit R5(A) TRUE COPY OF THE CLAIM SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR

Exhibit R15(B) TRUE COPY OF THE CLAIM SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR