High Court Kerala High Court

State Of Kerala Represented By … vs R.Krishnan on 12 November, 2007

Kerala High Court
State Of Kerala Represented By … vs R.Krishnan on 12 November, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

LA App No. 1372 of 2007()


1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL
                      ...  Petitioner
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,KASARGOD.

                        Vs



1. R.KRISHNAN,S/O.RAMAN,CHEMBARIKA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (CONSTRUCTION)

                For Petitioner  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice HARUN-UL-RASHID

 Dated :12/11/2007

 O R D E R
           KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ.
               -----------------------------------------
                      L.A.A. NO. 1372 OF 2007
                                  &
                    C.M. Appl. No. 1593 OF 2007
               -----------------------------------------
         Dated this the 12th day of November, 2007.


                          J U D G M E N T

Kurian Joseph, J.

C.M. Appl. No. 1593/2007

This is a petition to condone the delay of 908 days in filing

the appeal. On merits it is seen that the appeal is filed against

the judgment and decree in L.A.R. No. 90/2001 on the file of the

Sub Court, Kasaragod. Acquisition is for the purpose of doubling

of railway track from Thalappady to Trikarippur.

2. The enhancement is only at the rate of 40% over and

above the land value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer. Such

enhancement is made based on the finding that the basic land

and the acquired land are not similar and similarly situated and in

view of the report of the Advocate Commissioner regarding the

potentiality of the acquired land. It was found that the acquired

land is a flat dry land.

L.A.A. 1372/07 2

In view of the evidence thus available on record, the

enhancement at the rate of 40% cannot in any way held to be

excessive. Thus there is no merit in the appeal. Therefore, the

application for condonation of delay and the appeal are

dismissed.

KURIAN JOSEPH
JUDGE

HARUN-UL-RASHID
JUDGE

smp