The Court set aside a land reference award due to non-impleadment of the requisitioning authority (KSEB). The matter was remanded for a revised award with opportunity for evidence. Court fee refund was partially denied.
Set aside the impugned judgment and decree; remanded LAR No.19/99 for impleadment of K.S.E.B. and passing a revised award.
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 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI
FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2012/12TH PHALGUNA 1933
LA.App..No. 63 of 2003 (A)
LAR.19/1999 of SUB COURT, NEDUMANGAD
APPELLANT(S)/CLAIMANT::
DR.DUGLUSS LINSBY, KURUVILANCHAL VEEDU, ANAD MURI, PALODE VILLAGE NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.M.M.HUSAIN
RESPONDENT(S):
THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-03-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & A. V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, JJ.
L. A. A No.63 of 2003
Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2012
JUDGMENT
Pius C. Kuriakose, J
Even though in this appeal preferred by the claimant it is urged that the compensation awarded by the Reference Court is inadequate, we are not inclined to examine the merits of the grounds as it is pointed out by Sri.C.R.Syamkumar, the learned Senior Government Pleader that the acquisition was for the purpose of Kerala State Electricity Board and according to him the LAR may have to go back for impleading the Requisitioning Authority. Therefore, we set aside the judgment and decree under appeal and remand LAR No.19/99 in view of the principles laid down by this Court in Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1995(2) KLT, 683) . The learned Subordinate Judge will implead the Kerala State Electricity Board as additional
L. A. A No.63 of 2003 -2-
party in the LAR and issue notice to them. Revised award will be passed by the learned Subordinate Judge after affording opportunity to all parties to adduce whatever further evidence they want to. Needful in compliance with the above direction will be done by the learned Subordinate Judge early and at any rate within three months of the court re-opening after midsummer recess. Since some responsibility for not impleading the Requisitioning Authority can be fastened on the appellant also, we are not inclined to refund the full court fee paid on the appeal memorandum. Registry will refund only half of the court fee remitted on the appeal memorandum to the learned counsel for the appellant.
Sd/-/-
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE
Sd/A. V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE
kns/-
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
L. A. A No.63 of 2003 -3-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the land acquisition reference should be remanded upon non-impleadment of the Requisitioning Authority.
Whether the compensation awarded by the Reference Court is adequate.
Whether the appeal court should allow refund of full court fees.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. State of KeralaRelied on¶23
Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1995(2) KLT, 683)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dr. Dugluss Linsby
State of Kerala
K.S.E.B.
Pius C. Kuriakose
A.V. Ramakrishna Pillai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
