State Of Kerala vs Sudha on 2 February, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

RP.No. 404 of 2008()


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

                        Vs



1. SUDHA, D/O.GOPALA PILLAI, POOVASSERIL,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

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

 Dated :02/02/2010

 O R D E R
       KURIAN JOSEPH (Ag.CJ) & HARUN-UL-RASHID, J.
                 -----------------------------------
                        R.P.No.404 of 2008
                                 in
                      L.A.A.No.300 of 2007
                  ---------------------------------
            Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2010

                            O R D E R

Harun-Ul-Rashid, J.

Appeal filed as L.A.A.No.300 of 2007 by the Special

Tahsildar was dismissed by judgment dated 5.2.2008. The

acquired property is classified under Group III B wet land.

The reference court fixed the land value relying on the

judgment dated 29.7.2005 in L.A.R.No.48 of 2003 and

awarded Rs.29,625/- per cent less Rs.1,980/- already

awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. The reference

court held that the land involved in the case is classified as

Group III B wet land and held that the classification should

have been under Group III A dry land. This Court after

considering the rival contentions took the view that the

fixation of the land value at Rs.29,625/- per cent is just and

reasonable. Therefore the appeal stands dismissed.

2. The appellant review petitioner contended that the

acquired land which is a paddy field was converted by the

claimant unauthorisedly and therefore the claimant is not

R.P.No.404 of 2008

2

entitled to the land value under category Group III A dry

land. The sum and substance of the contentions of the

learned Government Pleader is that the acquired land is a

wet land converted and therefore it should have been

categorised under Group III B. In Fact the very same

contentions are raised in appeal and this Court examined

the legality of the order passed by the reference court. This

Court on merits held that the categorisation made by the

reference court is correct. The nature of the land at the

time of the notification is the relevant factor, in the absence

of any collateral proceedings. There are no such

proceedings on the alleged conversion. The very same

contentions are urged in this review petition. Since the

question was decided on merits, the review petitioner is not

entitled to request for review on the same ground. This

Court held that the claimant is entitled to land value on the

basis of the nature and lie of the land under Section 4(1)

notification and upheld the value of the land fixed by the

R.P.No.404 of 2008

3

reference court at Rs.29,625/-. The contentions raised at

the time of final hearing of the appeal are only repeated in

this review petition. We find that no grounds are made out

to review the judgment.

In the result, review petition fails and accordingly, it is

dismissed.

KURIAN JOSEPH
(Acting Chief Justice)

HARUN-UL-RASHID,
(Judge)

bkn/-