Allowed

M.Romy v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Jun 2015WP(C)/14548/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging the rejection of an application for reference regarding a land acquisition award. The court held that service of notice by affixture at a father's hotel, where the petitioner resided elsewhere, was invalid. Consequently, the petitioner was within the limitation period, and the rejection order was quashed with a direction to make the reference.

What did the court decide?

The order rejecting the application for reference under Section 18 is quashed; the respondent is directed to entertain the application and make the reference within two months.

M.Romy Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/15TH JYAISHTA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 14548 of 2014 (P)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

M.ROMY A.M.KASSIM, TC.1/418 (25), ALIYAR BHAVAN KADAKAMPALLY VILLAGE, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 011.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.S.V.RAJAN

¶9

SRI.R.SUDHISH SMT.M.MANJU SRI.R.SANTHOSH (VARKALA)

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, CIVIL STATION, KUDAPPANAKUNNU P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 043, KERLA STATE.

¶12

THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR LA (GENERAL), CIVIL STATION, KUDAPPANAKUNNU P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 043, KERALA STATE.

¶13

R2 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.THOMAS JOHN AMBOOKEN

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C).No. 14548 of 2014 (P)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶18

EXT.P1.THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF AWARD DATED 25/6/2012 IN LAC NO.5/2012 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶19

EXT.P2.THE TRUE COPY OF THE FORWARDING LETTER UNDER REF.NO.LAC-5/12 DATED 30/7/2012 SENT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ON THE FILE OF THE SECOND ADDL.SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶20

EXT.P3.THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE DATED 20/9/2012 SENT BY PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶21

EXT.P4.THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 22/9/2012 ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶22

EXT.P5.THE TRUE COPY OF THE FORM NO.17 DATED 10/2/2012 PRODUCED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ALONG WITH EXT.P1 LETTER.

¶23

EXT.P6.THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 16/2/2012 MADE BY THE SPL.MESSENGER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT REGARDING THE RETURN OF NOTICE WITH REFERNECE TO EXT.P5.

¶24

EXT.P7.THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 29/6/2012 MADE BY THE SPECIAL MESSENGER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT REGARDING THE SERVICE OF EXT.P1 NOTICE.

¶25

EXT.P8. THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER UNDER REF.NO.A1-978/09 DATED 11/10/2012 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT.

¶26

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :

¶27

EXT.R2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.A1-978/09 (LAC-5/12) DATED 11.10.2012.

¶28

//TRUE COPY//

¶29

P.S. TO JUDGE.

¶30

V.CHITAMBARESH, J. --------------------W.P (C) No.14548 of 2014 --------------------Dated this the 5^th day of June, 2015

¶31

J U D G M E N T

¶32

There is nothing to show that the petitioner was either present or was represented before the Collector at the time the Award was made. The petitioner is thus entitled to prefer an application for reference within a period of 6 months. The period has to be reckoned from the date of receipt of Section 12(2) notice or the Award of the Collector. This is discernible from Section 18(2)(b) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

¶33

Service of notice by affixture is governed by Section 45(3) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The affixture has to be done in the place where the person ordinary dwells or carries on business. The petitioner resides at Aliyar Bhavan, Kadakampally Village and only his father runs the Hotel 'Moon Star'. Affixture at 'Moon Star' Hotel does not tantamount to service of notice on the petitioner as per law.

¶34

The petitioner is then entitled to a

¶35

period of six months from the date of Award. The Award was passed on 25.6.2012 and the application was filed

¶36

¶37

W.P (C) No.14548 of 2014

¶38

on 29.9.2012. Evidently a period of 6 months had not expired to make a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Ext.P8 order rejecting the application for reference is hereby quashed.

¶39

The second respondent is directed to entertain Ext.P3 application and make a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Such reference shall be made to the court of the Subordinate Judge having jurisdiction. The needful shall be done within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶40

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶41

Sd/V.CHITAMBARESH, Judge.

¶42

nj.

M.Romy v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Romy v. State of Kerala

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

P.v.Sudhakaran Vs the District Collector

Puthanveetil Aravindakshan Vs the District Collector

A.Jude Vs Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Thankamma Vs Addl. District Magistrate, Alappuzha

K. Sivadas Vs Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Robin Cheriyan Vs District Collector