Allowed

Annie v. the State of Kerala and Others

Kerala HC11 Sept 2012RP/238/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court, in a review petition, recalled a judgment that had closed a writ petition on the premise that an award was passed. Fresh evidence showed no award exists as proposed, and the government pleader admitted only requisition proceedings were pending, necessitating a re-examination of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Review petition allowed; judgment dated 31-03-2010 recalled; writ petition posted for admission.

Annie Vs the State of Kerala and Others — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/20TH BHADRA 1934

¶5

RP.No. 238 of 2011 (U) IN WPC/11363/2010

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC.11363/2010 DATED 31-03-2010

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER IN WPC:

¶8

ANNIE

¶9

W/O.KANJIRATHINGAL BABY, SAMBRATH ROAD, ALUVA TALUK ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS IN WPC:

¶12

1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT., REVENUE DEPARTMENT GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶13

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

¶14

THRISSUR HAVING OFFICE AT COLLECTORATE, THRISSUR.

¶15

3. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR,

¶16

(LA) THRISSUR CORPORATION, THRISSUR.

¶17

4. THE CHALAKUDY MUNICIPALITY, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, CHALAKUDY, THRISSUR.

¶18

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMBIL

¶19

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11-09-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

RP NO.238/11

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶23

ANNEXURE 1: A TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION BY THE CHALAKUDY MUNICIPALITY DT 11.6.2010.

//True Copy//

PA to Judge

ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ R.P.No.238 OF 2011

¶28

¶29

W.P.(C) NO. 11363 OF 2010

¶30

===================

¶31

Dated this the 11^th day of September, 2012

¶32

O R D E R

¶33

This review petition has been filed by the petitioner in the writ petition seeking review of the judgment dated 31^st of March, 2010. By the judgment, the writ petition was closed accepting he submission of the counsel for the Municipality that award has been passed.

¶34

However, Annexure I produced along with the review petition shows that there is no acquisition proceedings against the land in question. However, learned Government Pleader confirms that the land is also inquired into the requisition proceedings by the Government. Government Pleader also confirms that no award has been passed. Evidently therefore the assumption that award has been passed, which led to the judgment in question, was factually erroneous.

¶35

Therefore, the review petition is allowed and the judgment dated 31^st of March, 2010 disposing of the writ petition is recalled.

¶36

The writ petition will be posted for admission.

¶37

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE

¶38

Annie v. the State of Kerala and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Annie v. the State of Kerala and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chacko Thomas Vs the District Collector, Kottayam

Jayadev.P.S. Vs the Branch Manager, the Federal Bank Ltd.

Elavarasi Jayakanth Vs the Branch Manager

O.K.Ramadas Vs the Palakkad Municipality

A.M.Distributor Vs the Intelligence Inspector

Smt.Suma Mohan Vs Bank of Maharashtra