Allowed

Pothandy Nanu v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Mar 2012LA.App./1021/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an acquisition of land appeal, the High Court of Kerala allowed the appeal as the reference court erred in refusing to adjudicate merely due to the absence of the original power of attorney, as the original had been produced to the Land Acquisition Officer.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the award and remit the reference to the Additional Subordinate Judge at Thalassery to fresh discharge of enquiry with acceptance of Smt. P.K. Usha as power of attorney holder.

Pothandy Nanu Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

¶4

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI

¶6

WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2012/24TH PHALGUNA 1933

¶7

LA.App..No. 1021 of 2005 (A)

¶8

LAR.77/2001 of ADL.SUB COURT, THALASSERY

¶9

APPELLANT(S)/CLAIMANT::

¶10

POTHANDY NANU, S/O. GOVINDAN,

¶11

AGED 50 YEARS, KADIRUR AMSOM PONNIAM DESOM THALASSERY, REP. BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER P.K. USHA, W/O. NANU, AGED 39 KUNNATH HOUSE, KADIRUR AMSOM, PONNIAM DESOM P.O. WEST PONNIAM, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DIST.

¶12

BY ADVS.SRI.R.SURENDRAN

¶13

SMT.P.GOPIKA

¶14

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT:

¶15

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶16

MANAGING DIRECTOR, KINFRA,

¶17

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶18

R,R2 BY SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH R,R1 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.R.SYAMKUMAR

¶19

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14-03-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & A. V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, JJ.

¶21

L. A. A No.1021 of 2005

¶22

Dated this the 14^th day of March, 2012

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Pius C. Kuriakose, J

¶25

The claimant represented by his power of attorney holder one Smt.P.K.Usha is the appellant. Under challenge in this appeal is the award of the Reference Court by which the Reference Court confirmed the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer on the reason that Smt.P.K.Usha the person who represented the claimant in the reference case had not produced the power of attorney executed in her favour by the appellant.

¶26

We have heard the submissions of Sri.R.Surendran, the learned counsel for the appellant, Sri.C.R.Syamkumar, the learned Senior Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel for the Requisitioning Authority KINFRA.

¶27

Sri.Surendran submitted that the original power of

¶28

L. A. A No.1021 of 2005 -2-

¶29

attorney executed by the claimant/appellant in favour of Smt.Usha was produced before the Land Acquisition Officer and the Land Acquisition Officer passed the award virtually in favour of the power of attorney holder. The compensation money was paid to the power of attorney holder. The court also recognized the above power of attorney by issuing notice to Smt.Usha who is described in the court notice as the power of attorney holder of the appellant.

¶30

As directed by us Sri.Surendran has placed before us

¶31

the photostat copy of the power of attorney on the basis of which the award was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer. We are convinced on a perusal of the above power of attorney that Smt.Usha the power of attorney holder (who has filed this appeal on behalf of the appellant Sri.Pothandy Nanu) has been duly authorised to represent the appellant Sri.Pothandy Nanu before the Reference Court and also before this Court. The reasoning of the learned Subordinate Judge for refusing to adjudicate the reference is not sound. We set aside the award and remit LAR.77/01 to the

¶32

L. A. A No.1021 of 2005 -3-

¶33

Additional Subordinate Judge's Court, Thalassery for a fresh decision. The learned Subordinate Judge is directed to proceed with the enquiry of the Reference Case accepting Smt.P.K.Usha to be duly constituted power of attorney holder for Sri.Pothandy Nanu, the appellant. Smt.Usha should be allowed to adduce evidence in support of the claims of Sri.Pothandy Nanu and the reference should be answered on the basis of the entire evidence which comes on record and the evidence adduced on behalf of the claimant, the Government and the Requisitioning Authority. Parties will enter appearance before the Reference Court on 04/04/12. The registry is directed to refund the full court fee paid on the appeal memorandum to Sri.R.Surendran, the learned counsel for the appellant.

¶34

SD/PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE

¶35

SD/A. V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE

KNS/-

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

L. A. A No.1021 of 2005 -4-

Pothandy Nanu v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pothandy Nanu v. State of Kerala

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

Thresiamma Vs Kochi International Aiport Society

Justin Vs Jacob Shaji

Vijayan Vs Babu

State of Kerala Vs S.Prakasan

Martin Paul Vs State of Kerala

The Sree Sankaracharya Unty of Sanskrit Vs State of Kerala