AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sathish Ninan, J
Since judgment dated 14.12.2022 did not refer to the claim for compensation under the head severance compensation and injurious affection, this review petition was necessitated.
I have heard learned counsel for the review petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader.
The petitioner-appellant held 2 Acres and 48 cents of property. The acquisition for the purpose of MVIP Canal was approximately through the middle of the entire property separating it into two. An extent of 1.35 Acres lies on the southern side of the Canal – acquired property. Consequent on the acquisition, there is no road access to the property left on the southern side viz. 1.35 Acres. The petitioner claims an amount of ₹ 50,000/- towards the head of injurious affection.
The claim of the petitioner with regard to severance and the consequent loss of road access for the 1.35 Acres which lies on the south of the acquired property is established by Commissioner's Report (C1) obtained by the reference Court. Considering the extent of property that lies without road access, the claim for ₹ 50,000/- as compensation could only be held to be reasonable.
Accordingly, it is held that the review petitioner- appellant-claimant shall be entitled for an amount of ₹ 50,000/- as compensation under the head injurious affection. The judgment dated 14.12.2022 will stand modified including the said amount also towards compensation.