State Of Kerala vs V.C. Chandra Mohan on 18 December, 2009

0
164
Kerala High Court
State Of Kerala vs V.C. Chandra Mohan on 18 December, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

LA.App..No. 2328 of 2008()


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

                        Vs



1. V.C. CHANDRA MOHAN, S/O. LEKSHMANAN,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, INTERNATIONAL

                For Petitioner  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

                For Respondent  :SRI.R.S.KALKURA

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN

 Dated :18/12/2009

 O R D E R
       PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.

             ```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
                    L.A.A. No. 2328 of 2008 B
             ```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
            Dated this the 18th day of December, 2009

                             J U D G M E N T

Pius C. Kuriakose, J.

This appeal by the government pertains to acquisition

of land in Pettah village for the purpose of expansion of

International Air Port, Thiruvananthapuram. Relevant Section 4(1)

notification was published on 04-02-1999. The Land Acquisition

Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs.87,495/- per Are. The

reference court relying on Ext.A1 re-fixed the land value at

Rs.2,00,000/- per Are.

2. Our attention is drawn by Sri.Basant Balaji, learned

senior Government Pleader, to our own judgment in a number of

cases relating to acquisition for the same purpose. The learned

Government Pleader submitted that the maximum enhancement,

which has been approved by this Court in similar cases, is 90%

over what was awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. The

learned Government Pleader requested that the enhancement

may be below 90% of what was granted by the Land Acquisition

LAA.2328/08
: 2 :

Officer. Learned counsel for the respondent, however, would

support the impugned judgment. He would argue that the property

under acquisition has special advantages which justify special

treatment.

3. Having considered the rival submissions, we are of the

view that the evidence on record will not justify award of more than

Rs,1,70,000/- per Are for the property under acquisition. We are

of the view that the rate fixed by the learned Sub Judge is slightly

excessive. Accordingly, interfering with the impugned judgment,

we re-fix the land value at Rs.1,70,000/- petitioner Are.

The appeal is allowed to the above extent. It is clarified that

the claimant will be entitled for all statutory benefits on the total

enhanced compensation to which the appellant becomes eligible

by virtue of this judgment. Parties are directed to suffer their

costs.

(PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE)

(K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE)
aks

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *