Remanded

State of Kerala,Rep.by Spl.Tahasildar v. Sainudheen

Kerala HC7 Apr 2009LA.App./36/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench set aside impugned judgments of the Land Acquisition Reference Court and remanded the cases to the Subordinate Judge at Ottappalam. The court directed the reference court to implead the Municipality, address the exact extent of acquired property, and allow fresh evidence within four months.

What did the court decide?

Set aside impugned judgments and decrees; remanded LAR cases to Subordinate Judge at Ottappalam with directions.

State of Kerala,Rep.by Spl.Tahasildar Vs Sainudheen — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

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 7TH APRIL 2009 / 17TH CHAITHRA 1931 LA.App..No. 36 of 2008(D) ------------------------LAR.12/2001 of SUB COURT, OTTAPPALAM ....................

¶2

APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT -----------------------STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LA(G),NO.1, PALAKKAD.

¶3

GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI

¶4

RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS/RESPONDENT ----------------------------------SAINUDHEEN, ELADATH HOUSE, OTTAPALAM AMSOM, ARIYOOR THEKKUMMURI DESOM, OTTAPALAM TALUK. ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH FOR R1 SRI.V.C.MADHAVANKUTTY FOR R1

¶5

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/04/2009, ALONG WITH LAA NO. 574 OF 2008 & CONNECTED CASES THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶6

PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ.

¶7

L.A.A.Nos.1191/2007 & 36,574,597,2386/2008

¶8

Dated this the 7^th day of April, 2009

¶9

JUDGMENT

¶10

Pius C.Kuriakose, J.

¶11

All these are appeals filed by the Government against

¶12

the judgment and decree of the land acquisition reference court at Ottappalam in cases pertaining to acquisition for the purpose

¶13

of Ottapalam Municipality. It is trite by now that in all proceedings for determination or redetermination of the compensation for the acquired property, the requisitioning authority also should be afforded an opportunity to participate in the enquiry. (See the judgment in Steel Authority of India's case). Following the said judgment, we set aside all the impugned judgments and decrees and remand the LAR cases back to the Subordinate Judges, Court Ottappalam. That court will implead the Ottappalam Municipality as additional party in the LAR Nos.8/2001, 12/2001, 30/2001, 5/2001 and 29/2001 and permit the claimant, the State as well as the Municipality to

¶14

L.A.R.Nos. 1191/07 &connected cases2

¶15

adduce fresh evidence, if they want to and pass revised judgment in the light of the evidence already on record and further evidence which may come on record. The revised judgment as directed above will be passed by the reference court at the earliest and at any rate within four months of receiving a copy of this judgment.

¶16

In L.A.R No.12/2001 against which L.A.A. No.36/2008 is filed, the reference court will specifically address and answer the dispute as to the exact extent of the property acquired and decided that issue also.

¶17

Allowed by way of remand. No costs.

¶18

PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE

¶19

C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE

¶20

dpk

State of Kerala,Rep.by Spl.Tahasildar v. Sainudheen

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Kerala,Rep.by Spl.Tahasildar v. Sainudheen

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Kerala Vs Sugathan

P.J.Paul Vs State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs Moothatt Ramakrishnan

Telecom Department,Rep.by Dist.Manager Vs G.Viswanathan Savitha Enterprises

The General Manager, K.S.I.D.C. Tvm Vs Karayi Divakdran & Anothers

Pilakkal Gopalan Vs State of Kerala