Remanded

State of Kerala v. Reshma B.Ramesh (Minor) and Another

Kerala HC10 Jan 2011LA.App./696/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In land acquisition appeals, the court held that impugned judgments were liable to be interfered with as per earlier decisions. The court set aside the judgment and decree, remanding the cases to the Subordinate Judge for fresh disposal after affording both sides an opportunity to adduce further evidence.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment and decree were set aside; LAR Nos.354/2006,228/2005 & 440/2005 remanded to Subordinate Judge for fresh disposal.

State of Kerala Vs Reshma B.Ramesh (Minor) and Another — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 10TH JANUARY 2011 / 20TH POUSHA 1932

¶5

LA.App..No. 696 of 2010(D)

¶6

-------------------------LAR.354/2006 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM

¶7

APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT NO. 1 IN LAR

¶8

¶9

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.T.T.JOSEPHINA

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/CLAIMANT AND RESPONDENT NO.2 IN LAR:

¶12

¶13

RESHMA.B.RAMESH (MINOR), D/O.BIJU RAMESH, "SAMTHRIPTHI", FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶14

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TECHNOLOGY PARKS, KARYAVATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶15

ADV. SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH FOR R1

¶16

SRI.P.A.AHAMED, SC, TECHNOPARK FOR R2 SRI.THOUFEEK AHAMED FOR R2

¶17

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/01/2011, ALONG WITH LAA NO.698 & 1185/2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

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

¶19

L.A.A..Nos.696,698 & 1185 OF 2010

¶20

Dated this the 10th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT

¶21

Pius C.Kuriakose, J.

¶22

These appeals by the Government pertain to acquisition of

¶23

land in Attipra Village for the purpose of expansion of Technology Parks at Kazhakuttom in Thiruvananthapuram District. These acquisitions were pursuant to a notification under Section 4 (1) published on 17/12/2003. We notice earlier judgments of this court in L.A.A. Nos. 1995,1332,2478 of 2008 and other connected cases dated 8/4/2009. We are of the view that for the various reasons stated in that judgment, the impugned judgments are also liable to be interfered with.

¶24

Hence, we set aside the impugned judgment and decree and remand LAR Nos.354/2006,228/2005 & 440/2005 to the Subordinate Judge's Court, Thiruvananthpuram for a fresh disposal after affording opportunity to both sides to adduce further evidence. While deciding the LAR cases afresh, that court will have due regard to the observation of this court in the

¶25

LAA.Nos.696/2010 & others 2

¶26

common judgment in L.A.A. No.1332/2008 series. Either the Government or the requisitioning authority will make available before the learned Subordinate Judge a copy of the above common judgment.

¶27

PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE

¶28

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE

¶29

dpk

State of Kerala v. Reshma B.Ramesh (Minor) and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Kerala v. Reshma B.Ramesh (Minor) and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Valsamma Thomas Vs State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs Mohanan

Paily & Another Vs State of Kerala,by Government Pleader

Thomas @ Moodadi Thomman Vs Circle Inspector of Police

A.Thankappan Vs State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs Premakumary