Disposed

K.M.Hydrose Koyathangal v. the Taluk Land Board

Kerala HC24 Jun 2010WP(C)/9815/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition by directing the First Respondent, the Taluk Land Board, to consider and pass orders on the petitioner filed under Section 85(8) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act within three months, after affording an opportunity of hearing.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the First Respondent to pass orders on the petitioner's claim petition within three months after an opportunity of hearing.

K.M.Hydrose Koyathangal Vs the Taluk Land Board — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2010 / 3RD ASHADHA 1932

¶5

WP(C).No. 9815 of 2010(B)

¶6

------------------------SM.58/1979 of TALUK LAND BOARD, MANNARGHAT

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

--------------K.M.HYDROSE KOYATHANGAL, AGED 61, S/O.KOCHIYIL MANATHALE SYED ABDU RAHIMAN & IMBICHIKOYA THANGAL, THALLACHIRAYIL, THACHANATTUKARA AMSOM DESOM, MANNARKAD TALUK.

¶9

BY ADVS. MR.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) MR.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH)

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

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

¶12

1. THE TALUK LAND BOARD, MANNARKAD.

¶13

2. K.M.POOKUNJI KOYATHANGAL, S/O.KOCHIYAL MANATHALE, KOYENJIKOYA THANGAL, THACHANATTUKARA AMSOM DESOM, MANNARKAD TALUK

¶14

3. THE TAHSILDAR, MANNARKAD TALUK OFFICE, MANNARKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶15

ADV.MR. M.L.SAJEEVAN – SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER.

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C).No. 9815 of 2010

¶18

EXT.P1:	COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 2.2.2010.
EXT.P2:	COPY OF DOCUMENT BEARING N.1899/1955 DTD 23.11.1955 OF THE MANNARKAD SRO.
EXT.P3:	COPY OF APPLICATIION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER THE R.T.A. ACT, DTD 12.3.2010.
EXT.P4:	COPY OF CLAIM PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R1 DTD 12.3.2010.

¶19

TRUE COPY

¶20

PA TO JUDGE.

¶21

S. SIRI JAGAN, J.

¶22

W.P.(C) No.9815 OF 2010

¶23

Dated this the 24^th day of JUNE, 2010

¶24

J U D G M E N T

¶25

The petitioner was in possession of certain properties. In

¶26

respect of that property, SM 58/79 was initiated by the first respondent. In those proceedings, the first respondent directed the declarant, the second respondent herein, to surrender 3.41 acres of land, which according to the petitioner does not belong to the declarant at all. The declarant is the son of the brother of the father of the petitioner. In a partition, by partition deed No.1899/95 of Manarkkad Sub Registrar’s Office, the said property was allotted to the petitioner and his brothers, is the contention raised by the petitioner. In the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed Ext.P4 petition before the first respondent

¶27

under Section 85(8) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. The petitioner seeks a direction to the first respondent to pass orders on Ext.P4 expeditiously.

¶28

I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. In

¶29

W.P.(C)No.9815/10

¶30

¶31

view of the circumstances, it is only appropriate that the first respondent passes orders on Ext.P4 expeditiously.

¶32

In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and all other concerned, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till orders are thus passed the interim order passed by this Court in this writ petition in respect of the petitioner’s property would continue to be in force.

¶33

S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

¶34

acd

¶35

W.P.(C)No.9815/10 3

¶36

W.P.(C)No.9815/10 4

K.M.Hydrose Koyathangal v. the Taluk Land Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.M.Hydrose Koyathangal v. the Taluk Land Board

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

P.Ramanathan Vs K.Balakrishnan Nambiar

M/S K.N.Security & Allied Services Vs P.Jagadeesan and Another

K.Muraleedharan Vs State of Kerala and Another

C.Rajeev Vs the Tahsildar

Navas. Rep. by P.A.H. Kunjikochu Vs Deputy Collector

Kamalamma Vs Kerala Water Authority