Dismissed

Jossy Thomas @ Josemon v. Mohandas

Kerala HC8 Jul 2014RP/456/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A review petition filed by a third party was admitted. The court refused to review the underlying judgment but clarified that the third party's title deeds must be considered during the survey and demarcation process and directed authorities to complete the process within two months.

What did the court decide?

Clarified that respondent authorities shall consider petitioner's title deeds during survey; proceedings to be completed within two months.

Jossy Thomas @ Josemon Vs Mohandas — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JULY 2014/17TH ASHADHA, 1936

¶5

RP.No. 456 of 2014 (Y)

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 30792/2013 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 24-03-2014

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONER/3RD PARTY :

¶8

JOSSY THOMAS @ JOSEMON, S/O.THOMAS, AGED 40 YEARS, VELLOORKUNNEL HOUSE, THIDANADU KARA, KONDOOR VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTYAM DISTRICT

¶9

PIN - 686 123,

¶10

REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER ELIYAMMA THOMAS W/O.M.D.BABY, RESIDING AT 'CARIS', MANALI PALAKKAD - 678 001.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.P.K.RAVI SANKAR

¶12

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 :

¶13

1. MOHANDAS, AGED 81 YEARS, S/O.MADHAVAN, RESIDING AT MUKKRAMKADU, KOTTEKKAD PALGHAT DISTRICT - 678 001

¶14

2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER MALAMPUZHA II VILLAGE, MALAMPUZHA,

¶15

PALAKKAD - 678 651

¶16

3. THE TAHSILDAR

¶17

TALUK OFFICE, PALAKKAD - 678 001.

¶18

R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON R2 & R3 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C. VINCENT

¶19

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-07-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

¶21

...2/-

¶22

RP.No. 456 of 2014 (Y)

¶23

APPENDIX

¶24

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES :

¶25

ANNEXURE A1	: COPY OF THE REGISTERED POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED
	8-4-2009 EXECUTED BY THE REVIEW PETITIONER.

¶26

ANNEXURE A2	COPY OF THE REQUEST FOR DEMARCATION AND SURVEY DATED 17-1-2012 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A3	COPY OF THE REQUEST FOR POINTING OUT THE BOUNDARIES DATED 17-1-2012 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A4	COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11-4-2012 IN WP(C) NO. 9183 OF 2012 ON THE FILE OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
ANNEXURE A5	COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 1-2-2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A6	COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. G4 2014/2607/9/500 DATED 24-5-2014 ISSUED BY THE TALUK SURVEYOR, PALAKKAD.
ANNEXURE A7	COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. 2014/2607/9/500 DATED 6-6-2014 ISSUED BY THE TALUK SURVEYOR, PALAKKAD.
ANNEXURE A8	COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 24-3-2014 IN WP(C) NO. 30792 OF 2013 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
ANNEXURE A9	COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. G4 2014/2607/9/500 DATED 19/6/2014 ISSUED BY THE TALUK SURVEYOR, PALAKKAD.
ANNEXURE A10	COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 28-10-1996 NO. 6696 OF 1996 OF SRO, PALAKKAD.
ANNEXURE A11	COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 28-10-1996 NO. 6697 OF 1996 OF SRO, PALAKKAD.

¶27

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

**A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J * * * * * * * * * * * * *** R.P.No.456 of 2014

¶32

in W.P.C.No.30792 of 2013

¶33

Dated this the 8^th day of July 2014

¶34

O R D E R

¶35

This review petition is filed by a third party who is affected by the directions issued by this Court in the judgment dated 24/03/2014. The only grievance is that the title deeds relied upon by him also should be taken into consideration while complying with the directions issued by this Court in the said judgment.

¶36

Though the claim projected by the petitioner does not warrant review of the judgment, however, it is clarified that the documents produced by the review petitioner shall also be considered by the respondent authorities while effecting survey and demarcation of the properties.

¶37

It is needless to state that the review petitioner shall co-operate with the proceedings and the entire process shall be completed by the respondent authorities within a further period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶38

This review petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶39

(sd/-)

¶40

(A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE)

¶41

jsr

¶42

R.P.No456/2014 in W.P.C.No.30792 of 2013

¶43

Jossy Thomas @ Josemon v. Mohandas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jossy Thomas @ Josemon v. Mohandas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ibrahim Paduvingal Vs K.K. Mohandas

Dr. K.E. Raneesh Vs Dr. B.S. Mavoji

E.M.Paul Vs Raghuram

Joseph Antony Vs Lincy Thomas and Others

The Tathamangalam Service Co-Operative Bank LTD.P.502 Vs State of Kerala

T.V. George Vs State of Kerala