High Court Kerala High Court

Ramakaimal Gopinatha Kaimal vs State Of Kerala on 30 June, 2008

Kerala High Court
Ramakaimal Gopinatha Kaimal vs State Of Kerala on 30 June, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

LA.App..No. 985 of 2007()


1. RAMAKAIMAL GOPINATHA KAIMAL,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K)

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

 Dated :30/06/2008

 O R D E R
                        PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J.
              - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                 L.A.A.Nos.985, 991 & 1136 of 2007
               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                         Dated: 30th June, 2008

                               JUDGMENT

All these appeals are instituted by the claimants against the

common judgment in LAR Nos.157/05, 153/05 &173/05 on the files

of the Subordinate Judge’s Court, Pala. Even though Mr.Mathew John,

learned counsel for the appellants addressed me on all the grounds

raised in the appeal memoranda, his submissions in the context of

the appellants’ claim for compensation on account of the diminution

of land value of the unacquired portions of the appellants, i.e., claim

for compensation on the ground of injurious affection or severance

appealed to me most. Of course, the learned counsel also submitted

that if an opportunity is given, the appellants will be able to produce

documents relating to the period of notification under Section 4(1)

and substantiate their claim for enhancement in land value also.

2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also.

3. Having considered the rival submissions addressed at the

Bar, I am of the view that considerations of justice demands that the

appellants are given opportunity to substantiate their plea for

compensation on the ground of injurious affection of the remainder

extent of the properties since it appears to me that there is some

LAA Nos.985/07 Etc. – 2 –

genuineness in the grievance of the appellants that the remainder

portions of the property have been completely deprived of the

frontage of Bajana Madom Temple Road which is said to be a

P.W.D.Road. Since the cases are being sent back to the reference

court, the reference court should grant opportunity to the appellants

to produce further documentary evidence for substantiating claim for

better land value also.

4. The result is that the common judgment and the decree in

LAR Nos.157/05, 153/05 & 173/05 are set aside and all the three LAR

Cases are remanded to the Subordinate Judge’s Court, Pala. The

parties will appear before the Subordinate Judge’s Court, Pala on 4th

August, 2008. That court will permit the appellants to adduce

evidence oral and documentary for substantiating their claims for

enhanced land value and also for compensation for the unacquired

portions of their lands on the ground of injurious affection. Further

trial will be completed and revised judgment will be passed by the

learned Subordinate Judge early and at any rate within three months

of the parties entering appearance pursuant to this order of remand.

If the Government wants to adduce counter evidence, the

Government can adduce counter evidence.

LAA Nos.985/07 Etc. – 3 –

5. The appeals are allowed by way of remand. Refund the full

court fee paid on the appeal memoranda to the counsel for the

appellants. Transmit the L.C.R. forthwith to the Subordinate Judge’s

Court, Pala.

srd                               PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE