The State Of Kerala vs Balan P.P on 6 February, 2007

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

LA App No. 792 of 2005()


1. THE STATE OF KERALA.
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. BALAN P.P.,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SECRETARY,

                For Petitioner  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

                For Respondent  :SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

 Dated :06/02/2007

 O R D E R
              KURIAN JOSEPH & K.T.SANKARAN,JJ.

                     -----------------------------------------

                   L.A.A.Nos.792, 1127, 1392  of  2005

                           & L.A.A.No. 61 of 2006

                     -----------------------------------------

                Dated this the 8th day of  February, 2007


                                 JUDGMENT

Kurian Joseph,J.

These appeals arise out of a common judgment in

L.A.R.No.411/2000 and connected cases on the file of the Sub Court,

Kozhikode. The acquisition is for widening Thadampattuthazham-

Parambikadavu road. On the side of the claimants, Ext.A1 document

was marked. A Commission was taken and the report and sketch were

marked as Exts.C1 and C2. There was no evidence on the part of the

respondents. The claimant was also examined. On evidence the

reference court found that 17.23 cents which is used for taking laterite

stone was sold at the relevant time for Rs.2,58,450/-. Therefore, the

value per cent was Rs.15,000/-. The reference court further held that if

such a barren land used only for extraction of laterite stone could be

valued at Rs.15,000/- per cent it was only just, fair and reasonable to

award 30% more to the acquired lands since those lands were situated

at a commercially important area. The learned Government Pleader

L.A.A.No.792/2005 and connected cases.

-:2:-

submits that there was no evidence available before the Court below to

grant such enhancement. We are afraid the contention cannot be

appreciated. The report of the Commission and the sketch would

indicate otherwise. All that apart, there is no evidence on behalf of the

appellants. Still further it is seen that there is no appeal in some of the

reference cases namely L.A.R.Nos.26/2001, 35/2001 and 135/2001.

For all the above reasons we do not find any merit in these

appeals. They are accordingly dismissed.

(KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE)

(K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE)

ahg.