Quashed

K.Preethakumari v. the Land Revenue Commissioner,Tvm. & Ors.

Kerala HC1 Mar 2016WP(C)/5318/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala set aside an order of attachment issued under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 against the petitioner. It held that the order lost its legal sanctity subsequent to the enactment of Act 28 of 2008, advising parties to work out remedies under that Act.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order is set aside. The writ petition is disposed of.

K.Preethakumari Vs the Land Revenue Commissioner,Tvm. & Ors. — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF MARCH 2016/11TH PHALGUNA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 5318 of 2006 (G)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

K.PREETHAKUMARI, AGED 39 YEARS, W/O.V.MUKUNDAN, CHERIYAMMA NIVAS, KOREICHAL, THIMIRI POST, CHERUVATHUR, KASARAGO DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.M.SASINDRAN SRI.SREEJITH S.NAIR

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KASARAGOD.

¶12

3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD.

¶13

4. THE TAHSILDAR, HOSDURG TALUK, KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶14

5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KAYYOOR VILLAGE, KAYOOR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶15

6. RAGHAVAN MASTER A., NHANAMKAI, P.O.THIMIRI, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶16

7. UNNIKRISHNAN A., NHANAMKAI, P.O.THIMIRI, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶17

8. A.NARAYANAN, NHANAMKAI, P.O.THIMIRI, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶18

9. ASWINI KUMAR, KANNADIPARA, KODAKKAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶19

10. BALACHANDRAN U.T., NHANAMKAI, THIMIRI P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶20

R1 TO R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.GIKKU JACOB

¶21

R10 BY ADVS. SRI.M.V.AMARESAN SRI.V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

sts

¶24

WP(C).NO.5318/2006

¶25

APPENDIX

¶26

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶27

P1 COPY OF THE SALE DEED IN RESPECT OF 40 CENTS OF LAND BELONGED TO THE PETITIONER.

¶28

P2 COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH OF THE LIE OF THE PROPERTY.

¶29

P3 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 25/4/2004 ISSUED BY THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER.

¶30

P4 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 3/8/2005 ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

¶31

P5 COPY OF THE SKETCH OF THE ALLIGNMENT ORIGINALLY PROPOSED AND THE ALLIGNMENT DIRECTED BY THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

¶32

P6 COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 18/8/2005 IN WP(C).NO.24478 OF 2005.

¶33

P6(A) COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 6/2/2006 IN WP(C).NO.24478 OF 2005.

¶34

P7 COPY OF THE TYPED VERSION OF THE COMPLAINT ON WHICH THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 7/2/2006 IS WRITTEN.

¶35

P8 COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF ATTACHMENT OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT

¶36

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:

¶37

R10(A) COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.4077/03 BY WHICH THE PETITIONER ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY IN THE YEAR 2003 DECEMBER.

¶38

R10(B) COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS ALONG WITH NEGATIVES SHOWING THE EXACT SITUATION OF THE DISPUTED LAND DATED NIL

¶39

R10(C) COPY OF THE REPORT PUBLISHED METHRUBHOOMI DATED 17/2/2006

¶40

R10(D) COPY OF THE BUILDING ASSESSMENT EXTRACT DATED 23/11/2005 ISSUED BY KAYYOOR CHEEMENI GRAMA PANCHAYAT.

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

sts

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶45

¶46

¶47

Dated this the 1^st Day of March, 2016

¶48

J U D G M E N T

¶49

The petitioner, challenging an order of attachment issued by

¶50

the first respondent has approached this Court. The attachment has

¶51

been ordered in terms of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967.

¶52

Ext.P9 is the said order.

¶53

This writ petition was filed in the year 2006. It appears

¶54

that the party respondents approached the first respondent seeking

¶55

for a direction to the petitioner to restore the paddy land.

¶56

In view of the fact that the Act 28 of 2008 came into

¶57

effect subsequent to the order of attachment, this Court is of the

¶58

view that the parties are free to work out their remedy under the Act

¶59

W.P.(C).No.5318/2006

¶60

-:2:-

¶61

28 of 2008. However, the order passed under the Kerala Land

¶62

Utilisation Order lost its legal sanctity after the enactment of the Act

¶63

28 of 2008. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside.

¶64

The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.

¶65

Sd/A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE

¶66

K.Preethakumari v. the Land Revenue Commissioner,Tvm. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Preethakumari v. the Land Revenue Commissioner,Tvm. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sameer Vs Radhakrishnan

Kunjali Jibran.a Vs the State of Kerala

Th Vicar Vs the District Collector

Latha Balan Vs the State of Kerala

Chelciya Varghese Vs State of Kerala

M.Aliyarkutty Vs State of Kerala