Remanded

Preethilatha Sasidharan v. Special Tahsildar(La)

Kerala HC16 Mar 2012LA.App./141/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside an award of the Reference Court that confirmed a low compensation figure due to the claimant's absence and failure to adduce evidence. The matter was remanded for a fresh decision with directions to afford the appellant an opportunity to present evidence, subject to conditions regarding interest.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment and decree set aside; L.A.R. 54/2008 remanded to IIIrd Addl. Sub Judge, Ernakulam for fresh decision with opportunity to adduce evidence.

Preethilatha Sasidharan Vs Special Tahsildar(La) — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH 2012/26TH PHALGUNA 1933

¶5

LA.App..No. 141 of 2012 ()

¶6

LAR.54/2008 OF III RD ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM

¶7

APPELLANT / CLAIMANT :

¶8

PREETHILATHA SASIDHARAN, W/O. SASIDHARAN, RESIDING AT PANICKASSERRY HOUSE, P.O. METHALA, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER AND HUSBAND, SASIDHARAN, S/O. KOCHUKALAVAN, RESIDING AT DO. DO. DO.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.K.S.BHARATHAN

¶10

RESPONDENTS / RESPONDENTS :

¶11

1. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION), INTERNATIONAL CONTAINER TRANS-SHIPMENT TERMINAL, VALLARPADAM, ELOOR.

¶12

2. THE CHAIRMAN, COCHIN PORT TRUST, WILLINGDOM ISLAND, COCHIN.

¶13

R1 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. C.R. SYAMKUMAR R2 BY ADV. SRI. E.K. NANDAKUMAR, SC

¶14

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-03-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, JJ. ===================== L.A.A. NO. 141 OF 2012

¶17

===================== Dated this the 16^th day of March 2012

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Pius C.Kuriakose,J.

¶20

Under challenge in this appeal preferred as an indigent person by the claimant is the award of the Reference Court confirming the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer on the reason that the appellant claimant did not adduce any evidence and was not even present when the L.A.R.was listed for trial.

¶21

Having considered the grounds raised in the memorandum of appeal and submissions addressed at the Bar by the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Senior Government Pleader Sri C.R.Syamkumar, we are of the view that the appellant can be given opportunity to adduce evidence for substantiating her claims before the Reference Court subject to conditions. Accordingly, we set aside the judgment and decree under appeal and remand L.A.R.No.54/2008 to the IIIrd Additional Sub Judge, Ernakulam for fresh decision after

¶22

LAA 141/2012 -2-

¶23

affording opportunity to all parties (claimant, requisitioning authority and the Government) for adducing evidence for substantiating their rival claims and contentions. This order of remand, however, will be subject to the condition that if under the revised judgment to be passed by the Reference Court and the appellant becomes eligible for enhanced compensation, such enhanced compensation will not carry interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act during the period from 3/3/2009 to 31/3/2012. The parties will enter appearance before the Reference Court on the day of the court reopens after midsummer vacation. The learned Subordinate Judge will expedite matters and pass revised award within four months thereafter.

¶24

Sd/PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE

¶25

Sd/A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, JUDGE

¶26

ks. True copy

¶27

P.s.to Judge

¶28

LAA 141/2012 -3-

Preethilatha Sasidharan v. Special Tahsildar(La)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Preethilatha Sasidharan v. Special Tahsildar(La)

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

The National Thermal Power Corpn.Ltd Vs Oommen Abraham

Girija Kumari Vs State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs Bini

Ittoop Alexander Vs State of Kerala

Bipin Chansradas Vs G.Rajendran Nair

Shitesh Vs Rabiya and Others