Partly allowed

Vilasini Sivan and Others v. the Special TAHSILAR,L.A.NO.1, Kinfra

Kerala HC24 Jan 2011LA.App./60/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the lower court's negative award on the land acquisition reference, citing plausible explanations from appellants. The matter was remitted to the Subordinate Judge with stringent conditions including payment of sums to the Government and High Court.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment and decree set aside; case remitted to Subordinate Judge with conditions; appellants to pay Rs. 10,000 in costs.

Vilasini Sivan and Others Vs the Special TAHSILAR,L.A.NO.1… — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 24TH JANUARY 2011 / 4TH MAGHA 1932 LA.App..No. 60 of 2011(D) -----------------------------LAR.119/2003 of ADDL.SUB COURT, PALAKKAD ....................

¶3

APPELLANT(S): CLAIMANTS

¶4

¶5

VILASINI SIVAN W/O. LATE SIVANUNNI, 18/A, RAJAGOPALAN NAGAR, KUNYAMATHUR POST-641008 COIMBATORE DIST.TAMILNADU STATE. REP. BY HER P/A. RAHUL SIVANUNNI,S/O.LATESIVANUNNI, -DO-DO-

¶6

RAMESH SHILPE @ RAMESH SIVANUNNI, (DIED)

¶7

RAHUL SIVANUNNI, S/O.LATE SIVANUNNI, 18/A, RAJAGOPALAN NAGAR, KUNIYAMATHUR POST-641008, COIMBATORE DISTRICT, TAMILNADU STATE.

¶8

RITA SHILPE W/O.LATE RAMESH SHILPE APARTMENT NO.213, D.S.R. ELEGANCE,KORAMANGALA, 1ST ABLOCK, NEAR WIPRO PARK, BANGALORE-560034, KARNATAKA STATE.(REP. BY HER P/A.RAHUL SIVANUNNI, S/O. LATE SIVANUNNI,18/A,RAJAGOPALAN NAGAR, KUNYAMBATHUR POST-641008,COIMBATORE DIST.TAMILNADU

¶9

ROMIT SHILPE,S/O.LATE RAMESH SHILPE, APARTMENTNO.213,D.S.R.ELEGANCE,KORAMANGALA, 1ST BLOCK,NEAR WIPRO PARK,BANGALORE-560034, KARNATAKA STATE. REP. BY HIS P/A. RAHUL SIVANUNNI, S/O. LATE SIVANUNNI,18/A,RAJAGOPLAN NAGAR,KUNIYAMATHURPOST-641008,COIMBATORE DIST.,TAMILNADU DIST.

¶10

LAA. NO.60/2011

¶11

-2-

¶12

RIVKA SHILPE,D/O.LATE RAMESH SHILPE APARTMENT NO.213,D.S.R.ELEGANCE,KORAMANGALA,IST BLOCK,NEAR WIPRO PARK, BGNGALORE-560034,KARNATAKA STATE. REP. BY HER P/A. RAHUL SIVANUNNI, S/O.LATE SVIANUNNI, 18/A,RAJAGOPALAN NAGAR,KUNIYAMATHUR POST-641008,COIMBATORE DIST.,TAMILNADU DIST

¶13

(APPELLANTS 4 TO 6 ARE LEGAL HEIRS OF DECEASED APPELLANT NO.2)

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.O.RAMACHANDRAN NAMBIAR SRI.GEEN T.MATHEW

¶15

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT:

¶16

¶17

THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, L.A. NO.1, KINFRA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶18

GOVT. PLEADER SMT.T.T.JOSEPHINA

¶19

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & N. K. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ.

¶21

L. A. A. No.60 of 2011

¶22

Dated this the 24^th day of January, 2011

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Pius C. Kuriakose, J

¶25

This appeal preferred by the claimants is directed

¶26

against the judgment and decree of the lower court answering the reference under Section 18 in the negative i.e. confirming the award of the Land Acquisition Officer.

¶27

The reason for the negative award passed by the Reference Court is that the appellants did not adduce any evidence. In this appeal, the appellants have offered explanations as to why the appellant adduced evidence before the Reference Court. Some of the explanations are plausible. Hence, we feel that the appellants can be granted relief by imposing stringent conditions. The result is as follows:-

¶28

The impugned judgment and decree are set aside.

¶29

L. A. A. No.60 of 2011 -2-

¶30

LAR.119/03 is remitted back to the Subordinate Judge's Court, Palakkad. That court is directed to afford opportunity to both sides to adduce whatever further evidence they want to and to pass revised judgment. We make it clear that

¶31

this judgment will operate only subject to the following conditions:-

¶32

The 1/3^rd court fee remitted on the appeal

¶33

memorandum will not be refunded to the appellants.

¶34

The appellant shall pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- to the Government through the office of the Advocate General within two weeks from today.

¶35

The appellants will pay a further amount of

¶36

Rs.5,000/- to the High Court Legal Services Committee also within the same time limit.

¶37

In case the appellants become eligible for enhanced compensation by virtue of the revised judgment to be passed by the Reference Court, such enhanced

¶38

L. A. A. No.60 of 2011 -3-

¶39

compensation will not carry interest otherwise admissible under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act during the period from 31/01/09 to 31/01/11. If the conditions stipulated above regarding payment of cost are complied with, the parties will appear before the court below on 14/02/11 and the court below will do the needful and ensure that revised judgment is passed within four months thereafter.

¶40

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE

¶41

N. K. BALAKRISHNAN JUDGE

¶42

kns/-

¶43

The cost awarded of ` 5,000/- each has been paid by the appellant to the Government through the office of the Advocate General and to the High Court Legal Services Committee on 01/02/2011 vide memo of c.f.668/2011 dated 02/02/2011.

¶44

Sd/Registrar (Judicial)

Vilasini Sivan and Others v. the Special TAHSILAR,L.A.NO.1, Kinfra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vilasini Sivan and Others v. the Special TAHSILAR,L.A.NO.1, Kinfra

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

Sura @ SURENDRAN,C.NO.3690,C.P.,KANNUR Vs State of Kerala

Ponmudi Rubbers Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

Kochi Refineries Ltd.(Now M/S.Bharat Vs Rugmini Amma

The Secy. Koyilandy Municipality Vs M.M.M. Mariyakutty Umma

Inland Waterways Authority of India Vs Alphonsa Cardoz

State of Kerala Vs Mariyam