Johnson Joseph vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Oct 31, 2023

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1352200

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1352200
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice P.B.Suresh Kumar,Honourable Mr. Justice Johnson John
Decided On: Oct 31, 2023
Case Number: LA.App./331/2017

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Johnson Joseph

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....sub court, kottayam. the claimant in the proceedings is the appellant.2. a land belonged to the appellant has beenacquired for the purpose of doubling the railway line from mulanthuruthy to chengannor, pursuant to a notification issued under section 4(1) of the land acquisition act, 1894 on 20.10.2009. for the purpose of the acquisition, the land acquisition officer classified the lands under different categories, of which category d pertains to lands which do not have any road access. the land value assigned by the land acquisition officer for such lands was rs.36,141/- per are. the land acquisition officer classified the land of the appellant under that category. consequently, the land valuel.a.a. no.331 of 2017 3fixed was only at rs.36,141/- per are. the reference court, however, found that the land of the appellant is one that falls under category b namely, lands abutting panchayat roads, and re-fixed the land value at rs.1,48,585/- per are. it is aggrieved by the inadequacy of the land value fixed by the reference court that the claimant has come up in this appeal.3. heard the learned counsel for the appellant as also the learned government pleader.4. on a perusal of the materials on record, we concur with the finding of the reference court that the land of the appellant is one that falls under category b. even though there is no referencein the impugned judgment to the report of the advocate commissioner, we find that the advocate commissioner appointed in the proceedings has also stated categorically in his report that the land of the appellant is one abutting a panchayat road.5. it is seen that in terms of the judgment renderedby us in l.a.a no.494 of 2015 and connected cases, at the instance of the claimants in few other references made in connection with the very same acquisition, this court enhanced and re-fixed the land value in respect of lands brought under category b at rs.2,47,000/- per are. in the light of the said judgment, the appellant.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JOHNSON JOHN TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 9TH KARTHIKA, 1945 LA.APP. NO. 331 OF 2017 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 09.06.2015 IN LAR 40/2013 OF ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,KOTTAYAM APPELLANT/CLAIMANT: JOHNSON JOSEPH S/O JOSEPH, PUNCHATHALACKAL HOUSE,MUTTACHIRA, VAIKOM TALUK. BY ADVS. SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA REP. BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM 2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR LA. (RAILWAY), KOTTAYAM 3 THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (CONSTRUCTION) SOUTHERN RAILWAY, ERNAKULAM. R1 & R2 BY SENIOR GOVT.PLEADER SRI.T.K.SHAJAHAN. THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: L.A.A. No.331 of 2017 2 P.B.SURESH KUMAR & JOHNSON JOHN, JJ. L.A.A No.331 of 2017 Dated this the 31st day of October, 2023.

JUDGMENT

P.B.Suresh Kumar, J.

This appeal is preferred against the judgment in L.A.R. No.40 of 2013 on the files of the Additional Sub Court, Kottayam. The claimant in the proceedings is the appellant.

2. A land belonged to the appellant has been

acquired for the purpose of doubling the Railway line from Mulanthuruthy to Chengannor, pursuant to a notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 20.10.2009. For the purpose of the acquisition, the Land Acquisition Officer classified the lands under different categories, of which Category D pertains to lands which do not have any road access. The land value assigned by the land acquisition officer for such lands was Rs.36,141/- per Are. The Land Acquisition Officer classified the land of the appellant under that category. Consequently, the land value

L.A.A. No.331 of 2017 3

fixed was only at Rs.36,141/- per Are. The reference court, however, found that the land of the appellant is one that falls under Category B namely, lands abutting Panchayat roads, and re-fixed the land value at Rs.1,48,585/- per Are. It is aggrieved by the inadequacy of the land value fixed by the reference court that the claimant has come up in this appeal.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as also the learned Government Pleader.

4. On a perusal of the materials on record, we concur with the finding of the reference court that the land of the appellant is one that falls under category B. Even though there is no reference

in the impugned judgment to the report of the Advocate Commissioner, we find that the Advocate Commissioner appointed in the proceedings has also stated categorically in his report that the land of the appellant is one abutting a Panchayat road.

5. It is seen that in terms of the judgment rendered

by us in L.A.A No.494 of 2015 and connected cases, at the instance of the claimants in few other references made in connection with the very same acquisition, this Court enhanced and re-fixed the land value in respect of lands brought under Category B at Rs.2,47,000/- per Are. In the light of the said judgment, the appellant is also

L.A.A. No.331 of 2017 4 entitled to get the land value fixed in the said case, for the acquired land .

6. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the land value

payable to the appellant is enhanced and re-fixed at Rs.2,47,000/- per Are. The appellant would be entitled to the statutory benefits on that basis. All other directions in the impugned judgment will stand. Interlocutory applications, if any, pending in the appeal are closed. Sd/-P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE. Sd/-JOHNSON JOHN, JUDGE. amk

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties Johnson Joseph vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice P.B.Suresh Kumar,Honourable Mr. Justic...