IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 25TH MAY 2010 / 4TH JYAISHTA 1932 CO.No. 77 of 2008() ------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN LAA.404/2008 LAR.57/2003 of I ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... CROSS OBJECTOR/RESPONDENT/CLIAMANT ---------------------------- V.O.MATHEW, S/O. OMMEN, TC NO 3/21 PUSTHAKALAYAM, KESAVADASAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB P.ALEX SRI.JOSEPH P.ALEX CROSS RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS/ RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, (SPECIAL THASILDAR,LA (NH) KESAVADASAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD, NH DIVISION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.R.BINDU THIS CROSS OBJECTION/CROSS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ C.O. NO.77/2008 IN L.A.A.No. 404 OF 2008 ------------------------ Dated this the 25th day of May, 2010 O R D E R Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Even though Sri.Jacob P.Alex, learned counsel for the Cross Objector was very persuasive and appealing in his submissions, we do not find any way to grant relief to the cross objector. The Cross Objection is confined to the cross objector's claim for value for the building which is stated to have existed on the property under acquisition. Admittedly, at the time of passage of award and dispossession, no building existed on the property. The case of the cross objector is that anticipating that adequate compensation will not be paid and valuable building materials will be wasted if the building is allowed to be demolished by the Land Acquisition Officer, the cross objector himself removed the building. If that be so, he cannot legitimately aspire for any compensation for the building in question. The Reference Court referred to Ext.R1 Mahazar, Ext.R3 valuation statement and rightly found that the cross objector's claim for compensation for the building cannot be upheld. We do not find any infirmity about C.O.No.77/2008 2 the finding of the Reference Court. The Cross Objection will stand dismissed, however, without any order as to costs. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM , JUDGE dpk