K.S.RAJAN (DEAD) THROUGH L.RS. vs. THE STATE OF KERALA

          REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos.6281­6282 OF 2009 K.S. Rajan (D) through LRs   ….Appellant(s) VERSUS The State of Kerala & Anr.        …Respondent(s) J U D G M E N T Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. 1) These   appeals   are   filed   against   the   final judgment   and   order   dated   05.03.2003   passed   by the   High   Court   of   Kerala   at   Ernakulam   in   LAA No.905 of 1995 whereby the Division Bench of the High   Court   dismissed   the   appeal   filed   by   the original appellant herein.   Against the said order, Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by ANITA MALHOTRA Date: 2018.08.10 17:14:16 IST Reason: 1 the appellant filed review petition being R.P. No.205 of 2004 which was also dismissed.  2) In   order   to   appreciate   the   short  controversy involved in these appeals, it is necessary to set out few relevant facts hereinbelow. 3) During   the   pendency   of   the   appeals   in   this Court,   the   appellant   died   and   his   legal representatives were brought on record. 4) The original appellant is the owner of the land measuring   around   4.30   acres   situated   in   the District   of   Kottyam   (Kerala).   The   State   of   Kerala issued   a   notification   dated   25.11.1980   under Section   4   of   the   Land   Acquisition   Act,   1894   (for short   called   "the   Act“)   and   acquired   total   land measuring   around   30   acres   in   Kottayam Municipality for implementation of   "multipurpose development scheme at Kodimatha" on the acquired land. It was followed by  declaration  under Section 2 6 of the Act. The appellant's land (4.30 acres) was also acquired in these acquisition proceedings by notification issued under Section 4 of the Act.  5) The Land Acquisition Officer (LAO) then held an enquiry, as contemplated under Section 11 of the   Act,   for   payment   of   compensation   to   the landowners and  by  his award  dated   06.08.1984 determined the compensation as under: For Dry land  : Rs.4631/­ per cent For Chira land : Rs.1725/­ per cent For Wet land : Rs.203/­  per cent 6) The   appellants   felt   aggrieved   by   the determination   made   by   the   LAO   and   sought reference   to   the   Civil   Court.   By   award   dated 28.02.1990, the Reference Court re­determined the compensation as under: For Dry land  : Rs.7500/­ per cent For Chira land : Rs.2000/­ per cent For Wet land : Rs.2000/­ per cent 3 7) Felt aggrieved by the award of the Reference Court, the State filed an appeal in the High Court of Kerala. The High Court, by order dated 23.06.1992 allowed the appeal and remanded the case to the Reference Court for fresh determination. After the remand, the Reference Court by award 07.01.1995 re­determined the compensation as under :  For Dry land  : Rs.5000/­ per cent For Chira land : Rs.2500/­ per cent For Wet land : Rs.450/­  per cent 8) By   the   aforesaid   award   passed   by   the Reference   Court,   the   appellant   felt  aggrieved   and filed appeal in the High Court. By impugned order, the   High   Court   made   partial   modification   in   the compensation and determined the compensation as under: For Dry land  : Rs.5000/­ per cent For Chira land : Rs.2500/­ per cent For Wet land : Rs.500/­  per cent 4 9) The   appellant   felt   aggrieved   by   the   order passed by the High Court and filed review petition in the High Court. By order dated 02.09.2003, the High Court disposed of the review petition and made partial modification in the compensation as under:  For Dry land  : Rs.8000/­ per cent For Chira land : No increase For Wet land : No increase 10) The   original   appellant   (landowner)   felt aggrieved by the order of the High Court passed in main appeal as well as in the review petition, filed the present appeals by way  of special leave in this Court. 11) So far as the appellants are concerned, they are mainly concerned with the determination made by the Courts below for the  “wet land” and “chira land”. 12) Therefore, the short question, which arises for consideration   in   these   appeals,   is   whether   the 5 determination made by the Courts below in relation to “wet land” and “chira land” is just and proper or it requires any modification by way of enhancement as claimed by the appellants (landowners) in these appeals. 13) Heard learned counsel for the parties. 14) At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the   appellants   brought   to   our   notice   that   the Reference Court in another case of the landowners, whose   lands   were   also   acquired   in   these   very acquisition   proceedings,   determined   the compensation at the rate of Rs. 2000/­ per cent for the wet land.  15) It was his submission that the determination made by the Reference Court was not challenged by the   State   and   hence   it   became   final.   Learned counsel,   therefore,   contended   that   since   the appellants’ land and the other landowners’   land, 6 who   were   awarded   compensation   in   these   very acquisition proceedings, are identical in all respects, therefore,   they   are   also   entitled   to   claim   the compensation at the same rate, i.e., Rs. 2000/­  per cent which was awarded to other landowners for their wet land.  16) We   find   force   in   the   submission   of   learned counsel for the appellants. It is more so when the learned   counsel   for   the   respondents   could   not dispute this factual statement except to support the reasoning and the conclusion arrived at by the High Court in the impugned order.  17) Even otherwise on perusal of the entire record of the case and the findings of all the Courts below, we are of the opinion that the findings recorded by the Reference Court in the earlier round of litigation awarding   Rs.   2000/­   per   cent   for   the   wet   land 7 though set aside by the High Court in the earlier round yet it  deserves to be restored again. 18) In   other   words,   in   our   view,   the   award   of Rs.2000/­  per cent for the wet land appears to be just,   proper   and   reasonable   keeping   in   view   the nature of the land, its surroundings and location and   similarity   with   the   land   owned   by   other landowners to whom compensation was awarded at the rate of Rs.2000/­ per cent.   In our opinion, it represents correct market value of the wet land on the   date   of   acquisition   (25.11.1980)   and   was, therefore, rightly determined by the Reference Court in   cases   of   other   landowners   in   relation   to   their lands acquired in these proceedings. 19) So far as the rates of other two nature of lands are concerned, namely, dry and chira, their rates do not call for any interference and nor any attempt 8 was made by the appellants to question its legality and, in our view, rightly.   20) In   this   view   of   the   matter,   we   are   of   the considered view that the appellants are entitled to claim compensation for their wet land at the rate of Rs. 2000/­  per cent in place of Rs. 500/­  per cent determined   by   the   High   Court   in   the   impugned order. As a necessary consequence, the appellants are also entitled for other statutory compensation payable   under   the   Act   keeping   in   view   the enhancement made by this Court. 9 21) In view of the foregoing discussion, the appeals succeed   and   are   hereby   allowed   in   part.   The Impugned order is modified to the extent indicated above.                    ………...................................J.    [ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE]                                      …...……..................................J.          [S. ABDUL NAZEER] New Delhi; August 10, 2018  10