Remanded

Ramabhadran v. Kannan Podiyan

Kerala HC4 Dec 2008CRP/692/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a civil revision petition challenging the dismissal of an appeal by the Land Reforms Appellate Authority. The appellate authority had erroneously remitted the case to the Land Tribunal instead of deciding the appeal on merits as previously directed by this Court. The High Court set aside the appellate order and remanded the matter to the appellate authority.

What did the court decide?

The appellate order A.A.20/03 dated the relevant date was set aside. The matter was remanded to the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Alappuzha to consider the appeal on merits and dispose of it in ac

Ramabhadran Vs Kannan Podiyan — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 4TH DECEMBER 2008 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA 1930

¶5

CRP.No.692 of 2008 (G)

¶6

---------------------------AA.20/2003 of APPELLATE AUTHORITY (LR), ALAPPUZHA

¶7

REVN. PETITIONER: SECOND RESPONDENT

¶8

--------------------------------------------------

¶9

RAMABHADRAN NAIR, BHADRESWARATHU EDAMON P.O., RANNI.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI. K.SHAJ SRI.SAJJU.S

¶11

RESPONDENTS: APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT/STATE

¶12

----------------------------------------------------------------

¶13

1. KANNAN PODIYAN, PALACKATTU HOUSE, EDAMON P.O., CHETHACKAL VILLAGE, RANNI

¶14

2. GEETHAMBIKA, BHADRESWARATHU, EDAMON P.O RANNI HOW RESIDING AT ARTI APARTMENTS, BLOCK NO.5, CHANNOD COLONY, VAPI, GUJARAT.

¶15

3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE GOVERNMENT PLEADER, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶16

ADV. SRI.C.C.PRAKASH FOR R1 SMT.M.A.THASNIM FOR R2

¶17

THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

K.P.BALACHANDRAN, J.

¶19

C. R. P. No.692 of 2008

¶20

Dated this the 4^th day of December, 2008

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Respondents 1 and 2 have already entered

¶23

appearance. Though office has noted that notice issued to R3 is not returned, it is noticed that R3 is the State of Kerala and the Government Pleader takes notice. Hence, service is complete.

¶24

The petitioner in this C.R.P is

¶25

counter petitioner in O.A.11/1989 on the file of the Land Tribunal, Pathanamthitta. The first respondent filed the said O.A against the second respondent and the revision petitioner under Section 80-B of the K.L.R Act for purchase of “kudikidappu” right. The claim was disputed by the petitioner. Considering the case on merits by Annexure-A-I order the

¶26

Land Tribunal dismissed the original application. Assailing the dismissal, the

¶27

-2-

¶28

C. R. P. No.692 of 2008

¶29

first respondent filed A.A.20/03 before the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Alappuzha. By a cryptic order without considering the case on merits, the appellate authority vide Annexure-A-II order dismissed the appeal. The first respondent preferred C.R.P.1049/07 before this Court and this Court set aside the order passed by the appellate authority and remitted the case back to the appellate authority to consider the matter afresh and dispose of the appeal in accordance with law after issuing notice to the parties and fixing the date of appearance and to dispose of the matter within a period of two months from the date of first posting of the case. Strangely enough, the appellate authority in a perverse manner has passed Annexure-A-IV order saying that it would be appropriate if the case is considered by the Land Tribunal and remanded the matter to the Land Tribunal without taking

¶30

-3-

¶31

C. R. P. No.692 of 2008

¶32

pains to consider the appeal on merits though he was expected to consider the appeal on merits in view of the order of this Court. For the sole reason that he has not discussed the merits of the case and passed a considered judgment in the appeal filed before him despite specific direction from this Court in Annexure-A-III order, the impugned order deserves to be set aside and I do so. A.A.20/03 shall stand remitted to the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Alappuzha who shall comply with the directions issued by this Court in Annexure-A-III order in C.R.P. 1049/07.

¶33

This C.R.P is disposed of with the

¶34

above directions.

¶35

K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE

¶36

kns/-

Ramabhadran v. Kannan Podiyan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramabhadran v. Kannan Podiyan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravunni @ Chandran Vs Sarala Bhaskaran and Others

Manherikandi Damodaran Vs Kooven Vijayan & Ors.

Fr.Tom Thomas Vs Fr.James Jacob

Tharipadath Muhammed Vs Muthalakandy Malu

Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. Vs Ammini Amma

State of Kerala and Another Vs K.T.Muhammadunni and Another