Allowed

State of Kerala v. Vicar St.Mary'S Church

Kerala HC11 Jul 2019CRP/519/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this civil revision petition arising from an execution proceeding concerning land acquisition compensation, the High Court of Kerala set aside an order that fixed a balance amount to be deposited. The court directed re-calculation of the balance by filing separate statements to ensure the deposited amount was first appropriated towards interest and cost, following the Supreme Court's ratio in G

What did the court decide?

The impugned order was set aside; parties directed to file separate statements showing the balance amount; executions court directed to pass appropriate orders after receiving statements.

State of Kerala Vs Vicar St.Mary'S Church — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 20TH ASHADHA, 1941

¶5

CRP.No.519 of 2011

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN EP NO.51/92 IN LAR 74/1980 of ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, KOTTAYAM DATED 12-07-2011

¶7

REVISION PETITIONER/JUDGMENT DEBTOR:

¶8

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM.

¶9

BY SPL. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LATHA T THANKAPPAN

¶10

RESPONDENT/DECREE HOLDER:

¶11

VICAR ST.MARY'S CHURCH ST.MARY'S CHURCH, ANICADU P.O., KOTTAYAM, PIN-686503.

¶12

BY ADVS. SRI.BABY ISSAC ILLICKAL SRI.ISAAC KURUVILLA ILLIKAL

¶13

THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

CRP.No.519 of 2011

¶15

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

Petitioner challenges the order dated 12.07.2011 in E.P.No.51/92 in LAR No.74/80. By the above order, the balance amount was fixed at ₹2,00,983.51 as on that day. The amount was

¶18

ordered to be deposited.

¶19

2. When the matter was taken up, learned Special Government Pleader (Land Acquisition) submitted that she has verified the calculation statement filed by the State. According to her, a mistake seems to have occurred in calculating the

¶20

balance statement. According to her, the amount deposited by the Government was first appropriated towards the principal amount, which is contrary to the principles laid down in Gurpreet Singh V. Union of India (2006) 8 SCC 457, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court had held that the amount deposited

¶21

shall be first appropriated towards the interest, then towards the cost and then towards the principal amount, unless the decree otherwise

¶22

CRP.No.519 of 2011

¶23

¶24

directs.

¶25

3. The learned Special Government Pleader sought permission to file a corrected statement of balance before the execution court. Accordingly, I am inclined to set aside the impugned order and direct both sides to file their separate statements showing the balance amount due. The court shall thereafter pass appropriate orders on the basis of the statement filed and further steps may be ordered on that basis. The court below shall pass appropriate orders within a period of one month from the date of appearance. Both sides shall appear before the court below on 05.08.2019.

¶26

Accordingly, CRP stands allowed.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE

¶29

Pn 12/07

State of Kerala v. Vicar St.Mary'S Church

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Kerala v. Vicar St.Mary'S Church

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

Vidyasree Vs Sunil.P.

P. Raveendran Pillai Vs Raman Pillai

Balakrishna Kurup Vs Kerala Financial Corporation

P.C.Shiju, Vs Pradeep Kumar.T.D.

Dr.Remya Immanuel Vs Lijo P.John

Sivan Nair, Vs Krishnankutty Nair