Disposed

E.Suresh Kumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC30 Nov 2018WP(C)/19506/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the court directed the land acquisition respondents to deposit 40% of the due compensation within 4 months. The remaining 60% must be released in 6 equated monthly instalments. A timeline deviation triggers recourse to the execution court.

What did the court decide?

Direction to release 40% of compensation within 4 months and the balance 60% in 6 equated monthly instalments.

E.Suresh Kumar Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 19506 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

E.SURESH KUMAR, AGED 57 YEARS, S/o.C.G.MENON, CHINGAPURATHU HOUSE,TRIKKUR VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK,TRIKKUR P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.BASANT BALAJI

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶11

2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KUDAPPANAKUNNU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 005.

¶12

3 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER P.W.D DIVISION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶13

OTHER PRESENT:

¶14

SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY,SR.GOVT.PLEADER

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

J U D G M E N T

¶17

The main prayer in this Writ Petition (Civil)

¶18

is as follows:

¶19

“A Writ of Mandamus, order or direction be passed directing the respondents to deposit the total amount of compensation in court due under E.P.142/2016 in LAR 117/2011 on the file of the II Addl Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram within a time to be fixed by this hon'ble court.”

¶20

WP(C).No. 19506 of 2018

¶21

-2-

¶22

2. Heard Sri.Basant Balaji, learned counsel for

¶23

the petitioner and Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶24

3. According to the petitioner, though his properties have been acquired by the respondents long ago, even now, he has not been paid any amount in respect of the said acquisition proceedings by way of compensation, etc. Now, that the petitioner has been constrained to initiate Ext.P-1 Execution Petition, E.P.No.142/2016 in L.A.R.No.117/2011 before the Additional Subordinate Judge's Court-II, Thiruvananthapuram, for execution of the judgment and decree in L.A.R.No.117/2011 on the file of the said court. It is pointed out that this Court in similar judgments as in judgment dated 12.4.2017 in W.P. (C).No.11504/2017 has ordered that respondents shall release and disburse 30% of the due amount within 2 months and thereafter the balance amount shall be disbursed in 4 equated monthly instalments succeeding to the first instalment.

¶25

WP(C).No. 19506 of 2018

¶26

-3-

¶27

4. Taking note of the above said facts and

¶28

circumstances disclosed in this petition, it is ordered that the competent authority among the respondents will ensure that 40% of the entire due amount is released and disbursed to the petitioner within 4 months and the balance 60% should be released and disbursed in 6 equated monthly instalments succeeding to the first instalment. If there is any deviance in payments from the from the abovesaid time line suggested by this Court, it is ordered that it is

¶29

for the petitioner to approach the execution court in

¶30

Ext.P-1 E.P.No.142/2016 arising out of

¶31

L.A.R.No.117/2011 on the file of the abovesaid LAR

¶32

court for finalisation of the Execution Petition in which case the Execution Court shall ensure that orders are passed on the Execution Petition without much delay.

¶33

With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition (Civil) will stand finally disposed of.

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

ALEXANDER THOMAS,

¶36

JUDGE.

¶37

Bkn/-

¶38

WP(C).No. 19506 of 2018

¶39

-4-

¶40

APPENDIX

¶41

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶42

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION NO. 142/2016 FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO EXECUTE THE DECREE IN L.A.R 117/2011. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CORONARY ANGIOGRAM REPORT OF THE PETITIONER DTD 04.08.2015.

¶43

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY OF DR. RANJITH MENON G DTD 11.08.2015.

E.Suresh Kumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

E.Suresh Kumar 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashique Mamu Vs the Village Officer

Sreevidya Sasidharan Vs State of Kerala

N.Rajamma Haridas Vs Union of India

Valsala Vs District Collector, Thiruvananthapuram

Ashakumar Vs State of Kerala

Zakheer Hussain Vs Union Territory of Lakshadweep