Kerala High Court
Saravanabhava vs The District Collector on 11 August, 2025
2025:KER:60896
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 20TH SRAVANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 1542 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
SARAVANABHAVA,
AGED 61 YEARS
S/O. NATARAJAN, PUTHENTHERUVIL, KOTTAPURAM, ALANGAD,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683511.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.K.R.PRATHISH
SMT.MANASI.M
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-
682030.
2 SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR,
COMPETENT AUTHORITY, LAND ACQUISITION, (N.H. 66),
ERNAKULAM, NORTH PARAVUR.
3 THE TAHSILDAR,
PARAVUR TALUK OFFICE, N. PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM-683513.
4 THE TALUK SURVEYOR,
PARAVUR TALUK OFFICE, N. PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM-683513.
5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
VADAKKEKARA VILLAGE OFFICE, PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM-
683522.
6 THE PROJECT DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, MAVELIPURAM ROAD,
KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM-682030.
7 SUSHEELA,
WP(C) No. 1542 of 2022 -2-
2025:KER:60896
W/O. LATE VASUDEVAN, VADAKKAN VEETIL, VADAKKEKKARA
P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683522.
8 BAIJU,
S/O. SUSHEELA, VADAKKAN VEETIL, VADAKKEKARA,
VADAKKEKKARA P.O., ERNAKULAM-683522.
9 SHAIJU,
S/O. SUSHEELA, VADAKKAN VEETIL, VADAKKEKARA,
VADAKKEKKARA P.O., ERNAKULAM-683522.
10 RATNVAVALLI (DELETED)
D/O. PARAMESHWARAN, CHAMPUSHERI, KALLETTINTHARA,
MURAVANTHURUTH, VADAKKEKKARA P.O., ERNAKULAM-
683522-
(DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AS PER THE ORDER DTD
16.8.2024 IN IA 4/2024 IN WPC.)
11 SABU (DELETED)
S/O. BALAKRISHNAN, KANDATHIL, MURUVANTHURUTH KARA,
VADAKKEKKARA P.O., ERNAKULAM-683522
(DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AT THE RISK OF THE
PETITIONER AS PER THE ORDER DTD. 19.6.24 IN IA 2/23
IN THE WPC.)
12 LUCY,
W/O. JOSEPH, PAINEDATHU, VADAKKEKKARA P.O.,
ERNAKULAM-683522.
13 RAMESH P.V.,
S/O. VIJAYAN, POOVANTHARA, THAZHAMTHURUTH,
VADAKKEKKARA P.O., ERNAKULAM-683522.
14 BABY (DELETED)
W/O. VALSAN, VALIYA VEETIL, THIRUTHIPURAM,
VADAKKEKKARA P.O., ERNAKULAM-683522.
(DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AT THE RISK OF THE
PETITIONER AS PER THE ORDER DTD 1.7.24 IN IA 3/24
IN THE WPC)
15 THANKAMANI,
D/O. PARAMU, POOVANTHURUTH, VADAKKEKKARA P.O.,
ERNAKULAM-683522.
16 VINOJ V.V.,
S/O. VALSAN,, VALIYAPURAKKAL VEEDU, VADAKKEKKARA
WP(C) No. 1542 of 2022 -3-
2025:KER:60896
P.O., ERNAKULAM-683522.
17 BHAVANI (DELETED)
W/O. GOPALAN, CHETTITHARA, MURUVANTHURUTH,
VADAKKEKKARA P.O., ERNAKULAM-683522.
(DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AT THE RISK OF THE
PETITIONER AS PER THE ORDER DTD. 19.6.24 IN IA 2/23
IN THE WPC.)
18 AMMINI (DELETED)
D/O. PADMAKSHI, CHIRIYAMVEETIL, MURUVANTHURUTH,
VADAKKEKKARA P.O., ERNAKULAM-683522
(DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AT THE RISK OF THE
PETITIONER AS PER THE ORDER DTD. 19.6.24 IN IA 2/23
IN THE WPC.)
19 GOPALAN (DELETED)
S/O. KRISHNAN, CHETTITHARA, MURUVANTHURUTH,
VADAKKEKKARA P.O., PIN-683522
(DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AT THE RISK OF THE
PETITIONER AS PER THE ORDER DTD. 19.6.24 IN IA 2/23
IN THE WPC.)
BY ADVS.
SHRI.MATHEWS K.PHILIP, SC, NHAI
SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE
SHRI.SANTHOSH KUMAR V.P.
SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE
SMT.ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM
SMT.V.T.LITHA
SMT.K.R.MONISHA
SMT.SHRUTHI SARA JACOB
SRI.SAJEEVAN KURUKKUTTIYULLATHIL
SHRI.VISHNU PRABHAKAR V.S.
GP- RIYAL DEVASSY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 11.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No. 1542 of 2022 -4-
2025:KER:60896
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 11th day of August, 2025
Above writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P15 order, and
seeking a consequential direction to respondent No.2 to refer the
dispute of payment of compensation of the property covered as per
Ext.P1 deed to the competent Civil Court as contemplated under
Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter
referred to as the 'Act, 1956').
2. It is averred that the petitioner is the owner of an extent
of 99 cents of land obtained as per Ext.P1 settlement deed. The
property was mutated in the name of the petitioner and tax was
also paid on 26.11.1969 as evident from Ext.P2. Petitioner was a
minor at the time of execution of Ext.P1 settlement deed dated
11.11.1968. Later, the family of the petitioner migrated from the
said place, and the petitioner was under the impression that the
said properties were looked after by the brothers of the father. But
recently the petitioner came to know that no land tax was paid in
respect of the said properties. Thereupon, petitioner submitted an
application before the Village Officer to allow the petitioner to remit
land tax, and also submitted Ext.P3 application before the 3 rd
respondent Tahsildar to permit him to remit tax. Ext.P4 report was
filed by the 5th respondent reporting that some extent of property
2025:KER:60896
has been acquired for the National Highway, and also sought the
service of the Taluk Surveyor to measure out the property and
identify the same before remitting the land tax. Though such a
direction was issued, the 4th respondent Taluk Surveyor by Ext.P5
intimated that since some portion of the property is lost, the
measurement can be done only after getting a direction from the
Court.
3. Petitioner submits that he has not transferred or
alienated any portion of the property to any person since 1968, and
in Exts.P6 and P6(a) encumbrance certificate no transactions are
recorded. Thereupon petitioner filed WP(C) No.17474 of 2020
seeking a direction to the Tahsildar to consider the application
submitted by the petitioner to measure out the properties, and said
writ petition is still pending consideration. Meanwhile, 2 nd
respondent issued notification under Section 3G(3) of the Act, 1956
in the newspapers inviting claim for all persons interested in the
land to be acquired in Sy.No.256/25, 256/26, 286/28 on
Vadakkekara Village. Though the petitioner is in absolute ownership
of property mentioned in the above survey numbers which are
covered by Ext.P1 settlement deed, Ext.P7 notification showed the
ownership of the extent of land notified in the same survey
numbers as in the name of other persons, who are impleaded as
2025:KER:60896
respondents 7 to 19, and the petitioner's name was not included
anywhere in the said notification. Ext.P8 objection was filed to the
said notification. Later 2nd respondent issued 3G(3) notification,
wherein also the ownership of the land is in the name of some other
persons, and the petitioner's name was not included. Thereupon
Ext.P10 objections were filed. Without considering Exts.P8 and P10
objections filed by the petitioner, Ext.P11 news report was seen,
wherein steps are being taken for the payment of compensation
amount to the eligible land owners. Thereupon petitioner
approached this Court filing WP(C) No.20713 of 2021 which was
disposed of as per Ext.P12 judgment directing consideration of
Exts.P8 and P10 objections filed by the petitioner. The 2nd
respondent after hearing the petitioner passed a detailed order
finding that the contention raised by the petitioner is not
maintainable and dismissed the same as per Ext.P15. In Ext.P15 it is
found that the properties acquired are in the ownership of some
other persons who are included in the notification, and petitioner
has no possession over the acquired properties. It is aggrieved by
the same that the present writ petition has been filed.
4. Petitioner relying on Section 3H(4) of the Act, 1956
submits that, if any dispute arises as to the apportionment of the
amount or any part thereof or any person to whom some or any
2025:KER:60896
part thereof is payable, the competent authority shall refer the
dispute to the decision of the Principal Civil Court of original
jurisdiction within the limits of whose jurisdiction the land is
situated. It is in clear violation of the said provision of the Act, 1956
that claim of the petitioner has been rejected as per Ext.P15 in spite
of the fact that the petitioner has title over the 99 cents of land as
per Ext.P1 settlement deed.
5. Detailed counter affidavits are filed by the learned
Government Pleader, National Highway Authority as well as the
party respondents. In the counter affidavit filed by the 2 nd
respondent it is submitted that an enquiry was conducted and
Exts.P8 and P10 objections were considered as directed by this
Court in Ext.P12 judgment and found that the petitioner does not
have possession in respect of land comprised in Sy.Nos.256/25,
256/26, 286/28 of Vadakkekara Village and that the petitioner could
not show the land he claimed with boundaries, and further that the
aforesaid land was in possession of the respondents with valid
documents in their name. Sum total of the contention raised by the
2nd respondent is that awards were passed in the name of the
persons who hold a valid title over the said properties. The details
of the transfer of valid title of the said property are detailed in
paragraphs 8 to 19 of the counter affidavit. Similar contentions
2025:KER:60896
were raised by the National Highway Authority as well as the party
respondents.
6. I have heard the rival contentions on both sides.
7. A perusal of Ext.P1 settlement deed by which the
petitioner obtained the property contains a recital that the
properties in respect of the petitioner and his brother, who were
minors at that point of time, their father Natarajan has right to sell
the said property for the benefit of the minors. A perusal of the
counter affidavit filed would show that these properties were
transferred by the said Natarajan who is the father of the petitioner,
in view of the fact that in Ext.P1 itself the said Natarajan was
permitted to sell the property for the benefit of the minors. It has
come out from the contention taken in the counter affidavit that the
awards were passed only in respect of persons who were holding a
valid title over the properties. It is further submitted that in Ext.P15
there is a finding that 13.55 ares of property comprised in Tandaper
No.1814 E2 of Vadakkekara Village is still in the name of the
petitioner. The petitioner has not averred in the writ petition as to
whether the said property is also part of the acquisition for the
widening of the National Highway. It is seen that Ext.P1 settlement
deed was executed in 1968 and the petitioner was 11 years old, and
he attained majority atleast by 1975. The first step taken by the
2025:KER:60896
petitioner for survey of the property was only in 2019. It has come
out from the pleadings in the case that the property which the
petitioner claims was transferred on behalf of the minor's guardian.
The Limitation Act, 1966 specifically prescribes a period of three
years for setting aside and transfer of the property made by the
guardian from the date on which the ward attained majority. Now
more than 45 years have passed since the documents have been
executed. Further, the counter affidavit would reveal that there was
land acquisition of the property during 1992 and there was no
objection from the side of the petitioner regarding the acquisition
and the payment of compensation.
Taking into consideration the fact that awards have been
passed and compensation has been paid in respect of the parties
who hold a valid title on the basis of a registered deed over the
property and acquisition, I am of the view that the rejection of the
claim of the petitioner for reference to a competent Civil Court as
provided under Section 3H(4) of the Act, 1956 as per Ext.P15 order
is perfectly legal and valid especially when the said provision only
deals with the situation where any dispute arises as to the
apportionment of the amount or part thereof which is admittedly
not the issue involved in this writ petition. In view of the above facts
2025:KER:60896
and circumstances, I find no reason to interfere with Ext.P15 order
and the writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
VIJU ABRAHAM
JUDGE
sbk/-
2025:KER:60896
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1542/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED DATED
11/11/1968 REGISTERED AS DOCUMENT
NO.3356/1968 OF PARAVUR SUB REGISTRY
OFFICE.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX DATED
26/11/1969 IN THE NAME OF PETITIONER.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
22/07/2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
OBTAINED AS PER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION
ACT.
Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED
30/07/2019 OBTAINED AS PER RTI.
Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY ISSUED BY THE
4TH RESPONDENT DATED 14/02/2020.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE
DATED 06/02/2019 ISSUED BY THE SUB
REGISTRAR, PARAVUR.
Exhibit P6(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE
DATED 07/07/2020 ISSUED BY THE SUB
REGISTRAR, PARAVUR.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED
IN THE MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED
14/02/2021.
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED 20/02/2021 ALONG WITH RECEIPT.
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED
IN THE MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED
21/08/2021.
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED 26/08/2021 ALONG WITH RECEIPT.
Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF
MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 17/09/2021.
Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
21/10/2021 IN WPC NO.20713/2021 OF THIS
HON'BLE COURT.
Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE HEARING NOTICE DATED
25/11/2021.
Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTE DATED
2025:KER:60896
07/12/2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
ALONG WITH RECEIPT.
Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DATED 22/12/2021.
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
Exhibit R7 True copy of the said letter LAC-
25/2021/VDK dated 05.12.2023 issued by
the 2nd respondent
Exhibit R7 (a) True copy of the discharge summary issued
from Medical Trust Hospital Ernakulam to
Mr. Biju C.V. on 30.05.2022
