Mathew George vs The State Of Kerala
2024 Latest Caselaw 10425 Ker

Kerala High Court

Mathew George vs The State Of Kerala on 11 April, 2024

Author: A.Muhamed Mustaque

Bench: A.Muhamed Mustaque

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
           THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
                                  &
          THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
    THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1946
                        RP NO. 475 OF 2023
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 29.09.2022 IN LA.App. NO.412 OF 2017 OF
                       HIGH COURT OF KERALA

REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT:


          MATHEW GEORGE
          AGED 64 YEARS
          S/O PUNNOOSE MATHEW (LATE),
          NERIATHARA HOUSE,
          KURICHY P.O., KOTTAYAM,
          PIN - 686532



          BY ADVS.
          ALEX.M.SCARIA
          A.J.RIYAS
          BEAS K. PONNAPPAN
          SARITHA THOMAS
          ALEN J. CHERUVIL
          SANJITH KUMAR R.

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS :
     1     THE STATE OF KERALA
           REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
           KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686001

    2     THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (L.A.)
          RAILWAY, KOTTAYAM,
          PIN - 686001

    3     THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (CONSTRUCTION)
          SOUTHERN RAILWAY, KARSHAKA ROAD,
                   ERNAKULAM SOUTH, KOCHI,
          KERALA, PIN - 682016
 RP No.475 of 2023
                                       2

        BY SRI.T.K.SHAJAHAN, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER

        THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.04.2024,         THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 RP No.475 of 2023
                                    3




                            JUDGMENT

A.Muhamed Mustaque, J.

The review petition is filed by the appellant. The

review petitioner's property was originally included in 'E"

Category classifying as 'nilam'. The reference court treating it

as "F' Category gave enhancement of the land value. The

petitioner, thereafter placed reliance on Ext.X1 award.

Ext.X1 award in fact is an agreed amount in DLPC meeting.

We could not grant any enhancement based on Ext.X1 award.

However, we gave a proportionate enhancement taking note

of the value in total compensation given in Ext.X1 award.

2. The petitioner submits that the review

petitioner may be given full opportunity to re-determinate the

value of the property by adducing evidence. According to the

review petitioner, the entire problem in this matter is on

account of an erroneous classification of land "E" Category by

the Land Acquisition Officer. In view of the fact that there is

a dreath of evidence and the petitioner wants to adduce fresh

evidence, we are of the view that an opportunity can be given

to the petitioner. Accordingly, we review the judgment and

remand back the matter to the reference court for fresh

consideration. The review petitioner is given liberty to

adduce fresh evidence to prove the market value of his land.

The appellant shall appear before the Court on 01.06.2024.

Thereafter, the reference court shall dispose of the matter

within a further period of six months. All parties are given

liberty to adduce fresh evidence. The appellant is entitled for

the refund of the court fee paid on memorandum of review

petition and appeal.

This review petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE

Sd/-

SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN JUDGE rkj

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE REFERENCE PROCEEDINGS DATED 08/12/2014.

Annexure A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF G.O.(MS) NO.

51/2012/TRAN. DATED 19/09/2012.