The High Court of Kerala held that a tenant has no independent locus standi to challenge land acquisition proceedings where the landlord owner has already consented to the acquisition of the entire property including the building. The writ appeal was dismissed.
Writ Appeal dismissed; no interference with the Single Judge's judgment found warranted.
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 HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DR. MANJULA CHELLUR
& THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JULY 2013/9TH SRAVANA, 1935
WA.No. 1588 of 2012 () IN WP(C).12198/2010
-------------------------------------------JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 12198/2010 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 06-06-2012
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
K.V. KUMARAN, AGED 69 YEARS, S/O.KUNHIKORAN, KODOTH VALAPPIL HOUSE, KAPPIL, UDUMA VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK.
BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SREEJITH
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
W/O.LATE E.P.KESHAVAN KUTTY NAIR, 'LAKSHMI NIVAS', KOTTACHERY, BALLA VILLAGE OF HOSDURG TALUK, P.O.KANHANGAD, P.A.HOLDER OF DR.C.SUKUMARAN NAIR, S/O.PARVATHI AMMA, AGED 63 YEARS, 'LAKSHMI NIVAS', KOTTACHERY , P.O.KANHANGAD-671315
R1 BY ADV. SRI.KODOTH SREEDHARAN R2 TO R6 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER MR.P.I.DAVIS
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-07-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.NO.1588/12
APPENDIX
APPELLANT'S EXTS.:
ANNEXURE A1: THE TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVITA FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN THE WRIT PETITION.
RESPONDENTS' EXTS.: NIL.
Srd
(True copy)
P.S. To Judge.
MANJULA CHELLUR, C.J. & K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
W.A. No.1588 of 2012
Dated this the 31st day of July, 2013
Judgment
Manjula Chellur, C.J.
It is not in dispute that the appellant-writ petitioner has approached the learned Single Judge contending that there is no justification in the land acquisition proceedings intending to acquire the entire property including the building exists on the land in question. The first respondent, who is the landlord of the building, has given consent for acquisition of the entire property which includes the building as well.
W.A.No.1588/12
2
circumstances, the appellant-writ petitioner has no locus standi to question the same as he cannot have any independent right than that of the landlord who has no interest in the building any more. In the light of above observations, we do not find any good ground to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed.
MANJULA CHELLUR, CHIEF JUSTICE.
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE.
srd
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a tenant in occupation of a portion of a building has locus standi to challenge land acquisition proceedings when the landlord has already given consent for acquisition of the entire property.
K.V. Kumaran
Smt. K. Susheela Nair
The Executive Engineer, Kerala State Transport Project Division (PWD), Payyambalam, Kannur
The Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Kerala State Transport Project, Kasaragod
Circle Inspector of Police Hosdurg
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kasaragod
Manjula Chellur
K. Vinod Chandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
