Allowed

Poovankulathil Thottam Puthiyapurayil v. Kaniyarvalappil Nabeesa

Kerala HC6 Feb 2013WP(C)/29453/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged certain reports and petitions in land tribunal proceedings. The court found prayers genuine, quashed specific exhibits, and remitted the matter to the Tribunal for reconsideration with a fresh report based on spot enquiry within three months.

What did the court decide?

Exhibits P3 and P5 quashed; matter remitted to Land Tribunal to call for fresh report from authorised officer after spot enquiry within three months.

Poovankulathil Thottam Puthiyapurayil Vs Kaniyarvalappil… — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.P.RAY

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2013/17TH MAGHA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 29453 of 2008 (F)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

POOVANKULATHIL THOTTAM PUTHIYAPURAYIL KUNHAMINA, D/O. UMMER ABDULLA, KOLASSERY AMSOM, KAMBIL DESOM, KOLASSERY P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE, SRI.M.K.ANIL KUMAR.

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1. KANIYARVALAPPIL NABEESA, W/O. MUHAMMED, KUTTIATTOOR AMSOM, DESOM, P.O.KUTTIATTUR, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶11

2. KANIYARVALAPPIL MOIDEEN, S/O.MUHAMMED, -DO- -DO-

¶12

3. KANIYARVALAPPIL SUBAIDA, D/O.MUHAMMED, -DO- -DO-

¶13

4. KANIYARAVALAPPIL MAJEED, S/O.MUHAMMED, -DO- -DO-

¶14

5. KANIYARVALAPPIL ASHARAF, S/O.MUHAMMED -DO- -DO-

¶15

6. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶16

R1 TO R5 BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN,

¶17

SRI.ALAN PAPALI,

¶18

SRI.NISHIL.P.S,

¶19

SRI.P.S.PRADEEP,

¶20

R6 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. THOMAS JOHN AMBOOKEN.

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06-02-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

Prv.

¶23

W.P.(C). NO.29453/2008-F:

¶24

APPENDIX

¶25

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶26

EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 31/07/1986 IN A.A. NO.3333/1978 OF THE COURT OF THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY (LR), KANNUR.

¶27

EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT. 27/02/2004 IN S.A. NO.730/1992 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶28

EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE REPORT DTD. 31/07/2006 FILED BY THE AUTHORISED OFFICER BEFORE THE LAND TRIBUNAL, PAYYANNUR.

¶29

EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE PETITION DT. 04/09/2007 IN S.M. 6038/75 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE LAND TRIBUNAL, PAYYANNUR.

¶30

EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 17/06/2008 IN S.M. 6038/75 OF THE LAND TRIBUNAL NO.II, PAYYANNUR.

¶31

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

Prv.

B.P. RAY, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 29453 of 2008

¶37

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

¶38

Dated this the 6^th day of February, 2013.

¶39

JUDGMENT

¶40

Heard both sides.

¶41

The petitioner has filed this writ petition with the

¶42

following prayers:

¶43

Issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records of the case and to quash the original of Exts.P3 and P4.

¶44

Direct the Land Tribunal-II, Payyannur to call for a fresh report from the authorised officer in S.M.6038/75.

¶45

On being mentioned, the matter was heard. I find that

¶46

the prayers in the writ petition are genuine. Accordingly, Exts.P3 and P5 are quashed and the matter is remitted to the Tribunal for re-consideration in accordance with law. Let the Land Tribunal call for a fresh report from the authorised officer who shall after making a spot enquiry or field verification with notice to the parties, submit a report within three months from the date of receipt of the order from the Tribunal.

¶47

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶48

sd/- B.P. RAY, JUDGE.

¶49

¶50

W.P.(C) No. -:2:-

Poovankulathil Thottam Puthiyapurayil v. Kaniyarvalappil Nabeesa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Poovankulathil Thottam Puthiyapurayil v. Kaniyarvalappil Nabeesa

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

Association of Planters of Kerala Vs State of Kerala

K.S.Vivekanandan Vs State of Kerala

Anthony Francis & Son Vs Union of India

Aysha Hosiery Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Employees Provident Funds Appellate

Sakthan. N. Vs K.K. Divakaran

P.K.Haridasan Vs State of Kerala