In a land acquisition appeal, the High Court observed that the appellant's counsel lacked records and the enhancement was limited to 45%, a rate approved in other cases. Consequently, the Court declined to entertain the appeal further and rejected it.
The appeal is rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH MARCH 2011 / 19TH PHALGUNA 1932
LA.App..No. 94 of 2006 (C) ----------------------------LAR.110/1999 of ADDL.SUB COURT,N. PARAVUR ....................
APPELLANT(S): ADDL. 2ND RESPONDENT
THE SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY OF SANSKRIT, KALADY.
BY ADV. SRI.B.S.KRISHNAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.K.ANAND, SC, SANSKRIT UTY. SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN,SC,SANSKRIT UTY. SRI.M.K.DAMODARAN SR. ADVOCATE, SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN SRI.ALAN PAPALI
RESPONDENT(S): IST RESPONDENT & CLAIMANT
GOVT. PLEADER SMT.T.T.JOSEPHINA
THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & N. K. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ.
L. A. A. No.94 of 2006
Dated this the 10th day of March, 2011
JUDGMENT
Pius C. Kuriakose, J
The appeal comes up in the defect list. It is submitted by Sri.Alan Papali that Sri.B.S.Krishnan is no longer the Standing Counsel for the Requisitioning Authority and that M/s M.K.Damodaran Associates of which he is a constituent is the present Standing Counsel. He submitted that he does not have any papers with him. On going through the impugned judgment, we find that the enhancement granted by the Reference Court is limited to 45% over what is awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. This Court has in other cases approved enhancement at that rate. We are, therefore, not inclined to entertain this appeal further. The appeal will stand rejected.
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE
N. K. BALAKRISHNAN JUDGE
kns/-
-2-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should entertain an appeal when the appellant's counsel lacks records and the enhancement is within recognized limits.
ADDL. 2ND RESPONDENT
THE SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY OF SANSKRIT, KALADY
STATE OF KERALA
ITTEERA OUSEPH
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE
N. K. BALAKRISHNAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
