{"id":5228,"date":"2009-07-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-07-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009"},"modified":"2015-04-06T04:46:27","modified_gmt":"2015-04-05T23:16:27","slug":"archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009","title":{"rendered":"Archdiocese Of Verapoly Rep.By … vs State Of Kerala on 13 July, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Archdiocese Of Verapoly Rep.By … vs State Of Kerala on 13 July, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nLA.App..No. 248 of 2007()\n\n\n1. ARCHDIOCESE OF VERAPOLY REP.BY ITS POWER\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,KERALA WATER\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.P.SAJAN\n\n                For Respondent  :ADDL.ADVOCATE GENERAL\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI\n\n Dated :13\/07\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n         PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.\n                      - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n                           L.A.A.No.248 OF 2007\n                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n                    Dated this the 13th day of July, 2009\n\n                                JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
Pius.C.Kuriakose, J.\n<\/p>\n
      The claimant being aggrieved by the refixation of compensation<\/p>\n
done by the land acquisition reference court is in appeal.               The<\/p>\n
properties were dry lands in Thrikkakara north village and were<\/p>\n
acquired for the purpose of Augmentation of Water Supply to Kochi by<\/p>\n
Kerala Water Authority. The relevant Section 4(1) notification was<\/p>\n
published on 6-1-1999. The land acquisition officer categorised the<\/p>\n
properties under acquisition into A and B. He included 56.80 Ares of<\/p>\n
land in category A and awarded land value at the rate of Rs. 92370\/-<\/p>\n
per Are corresponding to Rs. 37382\/- per cent. 12.60 Ares of land<\/p>\n
were included in B category on the reason that over that portion of the<\/p>\n
land High Tension Electricity lines were passing. The land acquisition<\/p>\n
officer awarded only a nominal value of Rs. 100\/- per Are for the above<\/p>\n
portion of the acquired property.\n<\/p>\n
      2.     The evidence before the reference court consisted of<\/p>\n
LAA.No.248\/07                      2<\/span><\/p>\n
Ext.A1 sale deed dated 13-05-1996. Ext.A1 revealed a land value of<\/p>\n
Rs. 66940\/- per cent. The claimants also relied on Ext.A2 judgment<\/p>\n
which was in respect of acquisition in the year 1992. Ext.A2 was in<\/p>\n
respect of properties enjoying direct frontage of the National Highway<\/p>\n
and the purpose of the acquisition under Ext.A2 was widening of the<\/p>\n
National Highway. Under Ext.A2 land value of Rs. 98800\/- per Are<\/p>\n
was awarded by the reference court.        Even though the Advocate<\/p>\n
Commissioner who filed Ext.C1 report had reported that Ext.A1<\/p>\n
property and the acquired properties were comparable , the learned<\/p>\n
Subordinate Judge did not become inclined to accept the above report<\/p>\n
of the Commissioner. According to the learned Subordinate Judge,<\/p>\n
Ext.A1 property was having direct frontage of the National Highway<\/p>\n
and hence the value in Ext.A1 will never be obtained for the acquired<\/p>\n
property which enjoyed the frontage of the Kalamassery-HMT road<\/p>\n
only. The learned Subordinate Judge to a certain extent relied on<\/p>\n
Ext.A2. What was done by the learned Subordinate Judge was to treat<\/p>\n
Ext.A2 property as properties having direct frontage of National<\/p>\n
Highway and acquired for the purpose of widening of National<\/p>\n
LAA.No.248\/07                      3<\/span><\/p>\n
Highway and add 75% towards passage of five year’s time and to<\/p>\n
deduct 30% for the reason that Ext.A2 property and not the acquired<\/p>\n
property enjoyed the direct frontage of National Highway. Thus the<\/p>\n
value of properties in category A was refixed by the learned<\/p>\n
Subordinate Judge at Rs. 120,080\/- per Are corresponding to<\/p>\n
Rs. 48595\/- per cent. The learned Subordinate Judge would uphold the<\/p>\n
claim of the claimant to a considerable extent in the case of properties<\/p>\n
included in category B by the land acquisition officer. The learned<\/p>\n
Subordinate Judge would fix 60% of the value fixed for properties in<\/p>\n
category A as the value for properties in category B. Accordingly, the<\/p>\n
value of properties in category B was fixed at Rs. 72048\/- per Are.<\/p>\n
      3.   In this memorandum of appeal, the appellant\/claimant<\/p>\n
assails the judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge on various<\/p>\n
grounds and contends that enhancement granted is inadequate. We<\/p>\n
have heard the submissions of Sri.Aloyisius Thomas, learned counsel<\/p>\n
for the appellant and those of Sri.Basant Balaji, learned senior<\/p>\n
Government Pleader for the government. We have also heard Sri.Babu<\/p>\n
Varghese, standing counsel for the Kerala Water Authority. We have<\/p>\n
LAA.No.248\/07                       4<\/span><\/p>\n
gone through the impugned judgment and have made a survey of the<\/p>\n
evidence which was available on record before the reference court.<\/p>\n
We are in agreement with the learned Subordinate Judge for having<\/p>\n
taken the view that it was Ext.A2 judgment and not Ext.A1 sale deed<\/p>\n
which had more relevance in the matter of determining the market<\/p>\n
value of the property under acquisition. However, we find that the<\/p>\n
learned Subordinate Judge went wrong in thinking that the time lag<\/p>\n
between the relevant Section 4(1) notification in Ext.A2 and the<\/p>\n
Section 4(1) notification in the present case is five years. In fact , it is<\/p>\n
atleast seven years. Following the principles laid down by the Supreme<\/p>\n
Court in G.M.Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. v. Rameshbhai<\/p>\n
Jivanbhai Patel & Another.<\/a> ( 2008 SAR (civil 894) and having regard<\/p>\n
to the locality where the acquired property was situated, we are of the<\/p>\n
view that the locality was urban in nature by all respects and percentage<\/p>\n
of increase per year during the relevant period of seven years must<\/p>\n
have been at the rate of 13%. Thus the 13% of the value revealed in<\/p>\n
Ext.A2 has to be added to the said value every year for determining the<\/p>\n
value of Ext.A2 as on the date of relevant Section 4(1) notification.<\/p>\n
LAA.No.248\/07                       5<\/span><\/p>\n
We can also approve the action of the learned Subordinate Judge in<\/p>\n
having made a deduction of 30% for the additional facility of National<\/p>\n
Highway frontage enjoyed by Ext.A2 property. At the same time, we<\/p>\n
notice that the acquired properties were from the point of view of<\/p>\n
appellant\/claimant part of a larger holding belonging to the claimant.<\/p>\n
We also notice some merit in the submission of Sri.Aloysius Thomas<\/p>\n
that the properties under acquisition in Ext.A1 were not enjoying<\/p>\n
direct frontage of the National Highway. In fact the acquisition was for<\/p>\n
formation of National Highway and not for widening of National<\/p>\n
Highway as wrongly thought by the learned Subordinate Judge.<\/p>\n
Taking these two aspects into account and having some regard to the<\/p>\n
recommendations of the Advocate Commissioner regarding the market<\/p>\n
value, we are of the view that on a better assessment of the evidence<\/p>\n
available in the case, the market value of the properties in category A<\/p>\n
will have to be refixed at Rs. 54,000\/- per cent.\n<\/p>\n
      4.    The learned Subordinate Judge has fixed 60% of the value<\/p>\n
payable for the properties in category A as the value of properties in<\/p>\n
category B. We feel that the learned Subordinate Judge was a little<\/p>\n
LAA.No.248\/07                       6<\/span><\/p>\n
miserly while fixing the value of properties in category B. On a better<\/p>\n
assessment, the value of properties in category B will have to be<\/p>\n
refixed at 70% of the value of properties in category A. Thus fixing the<\/p>\n
value of properties in category B will come to Rs. 93403\/- per Are<\/p>\n
corresponding to Rs. 37800\/- per cent. The value of properties in<\/p>\n
Categories A and B are refixed accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
      5.    The compound wall which existed on the acquired property<\/p>\n
was valued by the land acquisition authority obviously on the basis of<\/p>\n
valuation supplied by the Executive Engineer of PWD. This valuation<\/p>\n
is based on the PWD schedule of rates for materials and labour. It is a<\/p>\n
matter of common knowledge that PWD itself tenders out its works at<\/p>\n
an average of 30% above their own rates. The total value awarded<\/p>\n
towards value of structures including compound wall is Rs.80,374\/-.<\/p>\n
We are of the view that there is justification for awarding a further<\/p>\n
amount of      Rs. 24,250\/- to the appellant towards value of structures.<\/p>\n
Accordingly we award that amount also.\n<\/p>\n
       It is needless to mention that the appellant\/claimant will be<\/p>\n
entitled for all statutory benefits admissible under Section 23(1A),<\/p>\n
LAA.No.248\/07                         7<\/span><\/p>\n
23(2) and Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act on the total enhanced<\/p>\n
compensation to which he becomes eligible by virtue of our refixation<\/p>\n
under this judgment. Appeal allowed as above. In the circumstances,<\/p>\n
parties are directed to suffer their costs.\n<\/p>\n
                                             PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE
\n                                                     JUDGE<\/p>\n
                                              P.Q.BARKATH ALI
\n                                                       JUDGE<\/p>\n
sv.\n<\/p>\n
LAA.No.248\/07    8<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Archdiocese Of Verapoly Rep.By … vs State Of Kerala on 13 July, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM LA.App..No. 248 of 2007() 1. ARCHDIOCESE OF VERAPOLY REP.BY ITS POWER … Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA … Respondent 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,KERALA WATER For Petitioner :SRI.T.P.SAJAN For Respondent :ADDL.ADVOCATE […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5228","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nArchdiocese Of Verapoly Rep.By ... vs State Of Kerala on 13 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Archdiocese Of Verapoly Rep.By ... vs State Of Kerala on 13 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-07-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-04-05T23:16:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Archdiocese Of Verapoly Rep.By … vs State Of Kerala on 13 July, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-05T23:16:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1250,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009\",\"name\":\"Archdiocese Of Verapoly Rep.By ... vs State Of Kerala on 13 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-05T23:16:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Archdiocese Of Verapoly Rep.By … vs State Of Kerala on 13 July, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Archdiocese Of Verapoly Rep.By ... vs State Of Kerala on 13 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Archdiocese Of Verapoly Rep.By ... vs State Of Kerala on 13 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-07-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-04-05T23:16:27+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Archdiocese Of Verapoly Rep.By … vs State Of Kerala on 13 July, 2009","datePublished":"2009-07-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-05T23:16:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009"},"wordCount":1250,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009","name":"Archdiocese Of Verapoly Rep.By ... vs State Of Kerala on 13 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-07-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-05T23:16:27+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/archdiocese-of-verapoly-rep-by-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-july-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Archdiocese Of Verapoly Rep.By … vs State Of Kerala on 13 July, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5228","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5228"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5228\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5228"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5228"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5228"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}