Kerala High Court
K.R.Chandran vs Paravur Samooham on 4 April, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
THURSDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 15TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 29017 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
K.R.CHANDRAN
AGED 64 YEARS
S/O RAMASWAMY IYER, AJAYKRISHNAVIHAR, PUTHANMADOM,
KALAPPADY, NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 683513
BY ADV R.UMASANKAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 PARAVUR SAMOOHAM
KANNAMKULANGARA, KIZHAKKEMADOM, NORTH PARAVUR- 683513, REP.
BY ITS SECRETARY, G.VENKITA SUBRAMANIAN, RESIDING AT
T.C.11/567, NNRA-2, NALANDA, NANTHENCODE, KAUDIAR.P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695003
2 THE TREASURER
PARAVUR SAMOOHAM, KANNAMKULANGARA, KIZHAKKEMADOM, NORTH
PARAVUR., PIN - 683513
3 STATE OF KERALA
REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695001
4 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
COLLECTORATE, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 670002
5 THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR
OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL THAHASILDAR, LA(NH-66), UNIT-1, NORTH
PARAVUR.P.O, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 683513
6 NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA
VII/511B, NEITHELI-MAVELIPURAM ROAD, MAVELIPURAM, KAKKANAD.,
PIN - 682030
7 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
KOTTUVALLY VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 683519
8 SUGATHAN P V
S/O VELAYUDHAN, PATTARUPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHERIAPPILLI,
KAITHARAM PO, NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. [ADDL R8
IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 15/02/2024 IN IA NO. 01 OF 2023
IN WP(C) 29017/2023]
BY ADVS.
Manzoorali
MATHEWS K.PHILIP KALAPPURACKAL PHILIPOSE
PAUL K.VARGHESE
V.A.MUHAMMED(K/124/1984)
SHAHNAS A.H.(K/3053/2023)
GP - DEEPA V
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04.04.2024,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No. 29017 of 2023 :2:
VIJU ABRAHAM , J.
===========================
WP(C) No. 29017 of 2023
============================
Dated this the 4th day of April, 2024
JUDGMENT
The brief facts necessary for disposal of the writ petition are
as follows:-
It is averred that petitioner is a member and Ex-Secretary of the 1 st
respondent Samooham. As soon as the new office bearers took
charge they expelled the petitioner from the membership of the 1 st
respondent and the dispute regarding the same is pending
consideration in civil proceedings instituted by the petitioner. It is
further averred that a large extent of property of the 1 st respondent
was acquired for widening the National Highway Project and an
award was passed by the 5th respondent awarding a compensation
of Rs.4,61,93,085/-. It is further contended that though the total
compensation awarded was Rs.9,26,64,992/-, due to lack of
production of title deeds for the whole of the property only
Rs.4,61,93,085/- was ordered to be released. It is also averred that
the petitioner has submitted a complaint before the 5 th respondent
against disbursement of the amount to the present office bearers of
the 1st respondent, and based on the complaint the payment of the
amount was deferred.
2. Aggrieved by the same, respondents 1 and 2
approached this Court filing WP(C) No.33345/2022 and this Court
by Ext.P1 judgment directed the 5th respondent to reconsider the
matter. Accordingly, the 5th respondent reconsidered the matter
and sanctioned the disbursal of Rs.4,61,93,085/- being
compensation for 0.1863 hectares of land comprised in Sy.Nos.
146/12/B3, 146/12/A7 and 146/12/A8 in Kottuvally Village as per
Ext.P2 award. It is further made clear in Ext.P2 award that, since
the office bearers of the 1st respondent could not produce
convincing documents for a major extent of land, the issue of
disbursal of compensation for rest of the land acquired will be
considered later on production of documents. The apprehension
raised by the petitioner is that, the office bearers of the 1 st
respondent might have substantiated the title of the property for
which compensation is now directed to be disbursed as per Ext.P2
through doubtful procedures, and that the mutation has also been
effected by improper means, and in the said circumstances the
petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 appeal before the 4 th respondent. In
short, the grievance raised by the petitioner in this writ petition is
that the 1st respondent is not having valid records showing the title
over the entire property.
3. The 2nd respondent has filed a counter affidavit along
with a petition to vacate the interim order, granted against
disbursal of the amount dated 25.08.2023. In the counter affidavit
filed by the 2nd respondent it is contended that the petitioner was
not expelled from the membership by the new office bearers, but
as per the decision of the General Body since he committed
enormous financial misappropriation in the 1 st respondent when he
was an office bearer. Though his expulsion was challenged in civil
proceedings, no interim relief was granted to him. They would
further contend that a perusal of Ext.P1 judgment in earlier
proceedings which led to issuance of Ext.P2 award, it is conceded
by the petitioner herein that he has not raised any contest
regarding the compensation but the same is only against payment
of the amount to the office bearers of the Trust. It is further
contended that the petitioner has not approached this Court with
bonafides and he has been fighting with the association since his
expulsion by the General Body. He further contended that the
compensation amount disbursed to the 1 st respondent in respect of
the earlier acquisition of property for National Highway
Development was received in his own name and the amount was
not accounted properly which could be seen from Ext.R2(a) Annual
report of the organisation for the year 2017-18. It is further
contended that even the present election was held under the
supervision of the Advocate Commisioner appointed by the
Munsiff's Court, North Paravur in I.A. No.3/2022 in O.S. No.180/2022
and the election held to the office of the 1 st respondent is legally
valid, and they sought for a dismissal of the writ petition.
4. A statement has been filed by the learned Standing
Counsel for the 6th respondent National Highways Authority,
wherein it is contended that the Paravur Samooha Madam, the 1 st
respondent herein has claimed compensation for the acquired land
but they failed to produce all necessary documents sufficient to
prove the title and ownership of the properties, and the petitioner
has also filed an objection in this regard stating that a suit was filed
as O.S. No.180/2022 by the petitioner herein, and the National
Highways Authority decided to refer the matter for consideration by
the Principal Court of Original Jurisdiction under 3H(4) of the
National Highways Act 1956. But the said decision was challenged
in WP(C) No.33345/2022 and the said proceedings were set aside
directing the CALA to reconsider the matter pursuant to which
Ext.P2 order has been issued. It is further submitted that the 1 st
respondent has produced documents such as basic tax receipt,
possession and non-attachment certificate, encumbrance
certificate and certified copy of the settlement register in support of
the claim over the land acquired in Sy.Nos.146/128, 146/12A and
146/12A having an extent of 0.0164 hectare, 0.1441 hectare and
0.0252 hectare respectively, and on verification of the above
records it is seen that 1st respondent is eligible for compensation in
respect of the land acquired in the above survey numbers and
accordingly an amount of Rs.4,61,93,085/- was awarded to the
Paravur Samooha Madam vide proceedings dated 31.07.2023.
Since the documents produced in respect of acquired land in
Sy.Nos. 147/1, 146/11 and 146/6 of Kottuvally Village, Paravur Taluk
were not sufficient to establish their title and ownership of the land.
The compensation amount for the said property was determined as
Rs.4,64,64,161/- and the matter was referred to the decision of the
Principal Civil Court of Original Jurisdiction for adjudication and the
compensation determined was deposited before the Addl. District
and Sessions Court-II, North Paravur as per Proceedings
No.214/21/KTY-1721/2022 dated 22.08.2023. It is further submitted
that as per the direction issued by this Court in WP(C)
No.33345/2022 ample opportunity was given to the petitioner to
adduce evidence in support of his contentions but he failed to
substantiate his contentions with cogent reason.
5. A statement has been filed by the 5th respondent
wherein it is submitted that, pursuant to the direction issued by this
Court as per Ext.P1 judgment the parties were heard again and the
1st respondent has produced documents including the settlement
register in support of their claim over the land, and on verification
of the records it was found that the 1 st respondent has got title and
ownership over the above property acquired and was eligible for
compensation in respect of the land acquired to the tune of
Rs.4,61,93,085/-. Since they could not produce sufficient records to
substantiate their ownership of whole of the property the balance
amount of Rs.4,64,64,161/- was deposited before the Principal
Court of Original Jurisdiction for adjudication. Though the petitioner
was granted sufficient opportunity to adduce evidence in support of
his contentions, he failed to substantiate his claims with cogent
records. Though mutation has not been effected in favour of the 1 st
respondent in respect of the acquired lands the ownership over the
acquired land in Sy.Nos.146/12A and 146/12B was determined
based on the entries in the settlement register and other
documents. It is also contended that last settlement was conducted
in Kochi during 1905-1909 following the settlement proclomation of
1905 and as per the settlement register the ownership of the land
in Sy.Nos.146/12A and 146/12B vests with the 1 st respondent and
the relevant pages of the settlement register is produced before
this Court as Ext.R5(a).
6. I have heard the rival contentions of both sides.
7. The petitioner was the erstwhile member of the 1 st
respondent. The objection raised by the petitioner in the earlier
proceedings evidenced by Ext.P1 judgment is that he is not against
the award of compensation but his objection is only regarding the
entitlement of the present office bearers to receive the
compensation for the acquired land. Admittedly, the compensation
amount has been awarded as per Ext.P2 not in the name of the
office bearers of the association, but in the name of the 1 st
respondent. Therefore, the objection raised by the petitioner in this
regard is only to be repelled. Yet another contention raised by the
petitioner is regarding the title of the 1st respondent in respect of
the property acquired. The statements filed by the 5 th and 6th
respondents reveal that these aspects are fully gone into after the
matter was remitted back as per Ext.P1 judgment and only after
being satisfied regarding the title of the 1st respondent over the
property acquired that the award was passed in their favour. It is
also to be seen that as regards the property comprised in
Sy.Nos.147/1, 146/11, 146/6 acquired though the compensation
was determined to the tune of Rs.4,64,64,161/-, the same was not
disbursed to the 1st respondent for want of necessary documents to
prove title and ownership and the same has been referred to the
decision of the Principal Civil Court of Original Jurisdiction for
adjudication. Therefore, it is only on a conscious deliberation and
determination of the issue regarding the title that a portion of the
amount has been directed to be disbursed to the 1 st respondent.
Since the amount has been directed to be paid to the 1 st
respondent and not to the office bearers of the 1 st respondent, I find
no reason to interfere with Ext.P2 order and the writ petition is
accordingly dismissed. However, it is made clear that the
proceedings if any instituted before the Civil Court will stand
unaffected by the Judgments now passed by this Court.
With the above said direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
VIJU ABRAHAM
JUDGE
sbk/-
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29017/2023
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE W.P(C) NO. 33345/2022
ORDER DATED 08.06.2023 OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD DATED 31.07.2023
OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 22.08.2023
FILED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3(a) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 22.08.2023
ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 5TH
RESPONDENT
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
Exhibit R2(a) True copy of the Annual Report presented
by the petitioner for the year 2017-2018
till 2020 February which was placed
before the general body of the 1st
respondent for approval
Exhibit R2(b) True copy of the Report of the Advocate
Commissioner dated 25.05.2022 in
OS.No.180/2022 in I.A No. 3/2022 of
Munsiff Court, Paravur reporting the
conducting of election to the 1st
respondent Association.
ANNEXURE R5(a) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE
SETTLEMENT REGISTER
Exhibit R2(c) True copy of the land tax receipt dated
20.10.2023
Exhibit R2(d) true copy of the Possession and non-
attachment Certificate dated 20.03.2021
relating to the Samooham Trust
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE A DOCUMENT DATED
08.09.2010 ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL
TAHSILDAR
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
06.02.2024 BEFORE THE DIRECTOR
Exhibit P5(a) TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DATED
07/02/2024
Exhibit P5(b) TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD
DATED 09.02.2024
