Disposed

Sulochana M. & Others v. the Taluk Land Board & Another

Kerala HC8 Mar 2011CRP/88/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a ceiling case, the High Court directed the Taluk Land Board to afford petitioners an opportunity to prove land possession and exemption claims if they deposit Rs. 10,000 as costs within one month. Alternatively, the petition fails if costs are not paid.

What did the court decide?

Taluk Land Board directed to afford opportunity to prove case if petitioners deposit Rs. 10,000 as costs within one month; otherwise original order stands.

Sulochana M. & Others Vs the Taluk Land Board & Another — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 8TH MARCH 2011 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1932

¶5

CRP.No. 88 of 2011

¶6

LB.738/1973 of TALUK LAND BOARD, PALAKKAD

¶7

REVN. PETITIONERS: DECLARANTS

¶8

SULOCHANA M., W/O. LATE SUKUMARAN, MUKRANKATTIL (MUKRANKAD) HOUSE, KOTTEKKAD, KOTTEKKAD P.O., MALAMPUZHA-II VILLAGE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶9

SUSMITHA K.S., D/O. LATE SUKUMARAN, -DO- -DO-

¶10

SHYLA K.S., D/O. LATE SUKUMARAN, -DO- -DO-

¶11

SUBHASHINI K.S., D/O. LATE SUKUMARAN, -DO- -DO-

¶12

SUKURAJ K.S., (MENTALLY RETARDED), S/O. LATE SUKUMARAN,

¶13

-DO- -DO-, REP. BY HIS NEXT FRIEND, SULOCHANA M., W/O. LATE SUKUMARAN, MUKRANKATTIL (MUKRANKAD) HOUSE, KOTTEKKAD, KOTTEKKAD P.O., MALAMPUZHA-II VILLAGE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K. SRI.LIJU. M.P

¶15

RESPONDENTS: AUTHORITY AND NON-PARTY

¶16

THE TALUK LAND BOARD, PALAKKAD-678 001, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN.

¶17

STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶18

SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.B.RAMANAND

¶19

THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

K.T.SANKARAN, J.

¶21

C.R.P. NO. 88 OF 2011

¶22

Dated this the 8^th day of March, 2011

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

The petitioners are the legal representatives of the declarant in the ceiling case L.B.No.738/73 before the Taluk Land Board, Palakkad. The Taluk Land Board passed an order dated 30.11.2000, which was challenged by the widow of the declarant in C.R.P.No.55 of 2001. This Court directed the Taluk Land Board to consider the following points:

¶25

“1) The land to be surrendered by the declarant taking into consideration the land allotted to the share of the deceased declarant under the final decree and subject to the final decision in R.S.A.No.338/2006 which is pending against the final decree proceedings before this court.

¶26

1. In the objection filed by the legal heirs of deceased declarant they have submitted that some of the lands are in the possession of third party which was rejected by the Taluk Land Board as no evidence was adduced on this aspect. The legal heirs of deceased declarant are entitled to adduce evidence before the Taluk Land Board to

¶27

C.R.P.NO.88 OF 2011

¶28

:: 2 ::

¶29

show that those lands are in the possession of third parties. The Taluk Land Board is also directed to consider their contentions.

¶30

1. The legal heirs of deceased declarant in their objection has claimed certain lands which are to be exempted under Section 81 of the Act. Taluk Land Board is also directed to consider that contention of the legal heirs of deceased declarant. They are entitled to adduce evidence on this point before the Taluk Land Board.”

¶31

The Taluk Land Board was directed to dispose of the matter expeditiously, preferably within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

¶32

The Taluk Land Board issued notice to the legal heirs of the declarant and fixed a date for appearance. They appeared and requested for time to file statement. The case was posted on several occasions. However, they did not file any statement. They also did not adduce any evidence to prove their claims. Since the time limit fixed by this Court was getting expired, the Taluk Land Board rejected the claims put forward by the petitioners on the ground that they failed to adduce any evidence. It was also noticed that the final decision in R.S.A.No.338 of 2006 was also not known.

¶33

C.R.P.NO.88 OF 2011

¶34

:: 3 ::

¶35

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the case pending before the High Court is not R.S.A.No.338 of 2006, but R.F.A.No.338 of 2006.

¶36

When the Civil Revision Petition came up for admission on 22.2.2011, an order was passed by this Court, the operative portion of which reads as follows:

¶37

“3. In the facts and circumstances, the question whether an opportunity should be given to the petitioners to prove their case before the Taluk Land Board on payment of costs of `10,000/- will be considered after hearing the learned Government Pleader. The petitioners shall furnish a copy of the Civil Revision Petition to the learned Government Pleader. The Government Pleader will get instructions. Post on 4.3.2011.”

¶38

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader.

¶39

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that an opportunity can be afforded to the petitioners to prove their

¶40

C.R.P.NO.88 OF 2011

¶41

:: 4 ::

¶42

case before the Taluk Land Board. But, such an opportunity cannot be granted without any conditions. If the petitioners deposit a sum of Rupees Ten thousand before the Taluk Land Board as costs, within a period of one month, the Taluk Land Board shall consider the matter afresh and afford an opportunity to the petitioners to prove their case in the light of the directions in C.R.P.No.55 of 2001. To that extent, the order passed by the Taluk Land Board is set aside. If the petitioners fail to deposit the costs, the order passed by the Taluk Land Board dated 13.1.2011 shall be treated to be in force and the Civil Revision Petition shall be treated as dismissed.

¶43

On deposit of the costs as aforementioned, the Taluk Land Board shall afford an opportunity to the petitioners to prove their case in the manner indicated above. The Taluk Land Board shall dispose of the proceedings within a period of six months thereafter.

¶44

The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of as above.

¶45

ahz/

¶46

(K.T.SANKARAN) Judge

Sulochana M. & Others v. the Taluk Land Board & Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sulochana M. & Others v. the Taluk Land Board & Another

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

Shaiju.K and Another Vs State of Kerala

Bindu Thomas Vs v.Subramani

K.K.Reejabai Vs a.P.M.Mohammed Haneesh

I.Pathrose Vs Binil K.John & Another

Nazarene Fernando @ Nachi Vs State of Kerala

Jayanth R.Kanani Vs M/S.Sulfex India Pvt. Ltd.