Dismissed

V.O.Ouseph v. State of Kerala and Another

Kerala HC3 Jun 2019LA.App./302/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Kerala HC High Court suo moto recalled its earlier judgment in a Land Acquisition Appeal instituted by the Power of Attorney holder after establishing the principal appellant had died. The Court held the appeal was not maintainable, the prior judgment was non-est, and dismissed the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Land Acquisition Appeal rejected; judgment dated 3rd February, 2017 recalled suo moto.

V.O.Ouseph Vs State of Kerala and Another — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶6

MONDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1941

¶7

LA.App..No. 302 of 2011

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE IN LAR 9/2003 of SUB COURT, CHERTHALA

¶9

APPELLANT/CLAIMANT NO.1:

¶10

V.O.OUSEPH, VATHAPPALLIL PALLIPPURAM, CHERTHALA, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MATHEW S/O.OUSEPH, DO. DO.

¶11

BY ADVS. SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K) SRI.DOMSON J.VATTAKUZHY

¶12

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 KERALA STATE,

¶14

REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (L.A), INDUSTRIAL GROWTH CENTRE, CHERTHALA-688524.

¶15

2 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR K.S.I.D.C THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶16

BY ADV. SRI.JOBY CYRIAC FOR R2

¶17

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03.06.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

LAA No.302/2011

-:2:-

C.K. ABDUL REHIM

R. NARAYANA PISHARADI, JJ.

¶23

----------------------------------------------------L.A.A. No. 302 OF 2011

¶24

-------------------------------------------------------

¶25

Dated this the 3^rd day of June, 2019

¶26

J U D G M E N T

¶27

Abdul Rehim, J.

¶28

It is brought to notice of this court that, at the time of institution of the above appeal, the appellant was not alive. The appeal was instituted by the son of the appellant as the power of attorney holder. But it is pertinent to note that the power of attorney itself was not valid because of the death of the appellant on 11.09.2009. However, the appeal happened to be disposed of without noticing the situation as mentioned above, through a common judgment, dated 3^rd February, 2017. The appeal was allowed and enhancement of compensation was awarded.

¶29

LAA No.302/2011

¶30

-:3:-

¶31

We are of the considered opinion that the appeal

¶32

itself is not sustainable, as it is filed by a dead person. As a consequence, the judgment passed by this court on 03.02.2017

¶33

is non-est in the eye of law. Hence we are inclined to recall the

¶34

judgment suo moto .

¶35

In the result, the judgment passed in LAA 302 of 2011 dated 3^rd February, 2017 is recalled suo moto . LAA 302 of 2011 is found as not maintainable as it is filed by a dead person.

¶36

Hence the above Land Acquisition Appeal is hereby rejected.

¶37

The Registry shall return the certified copy of the impugned judgment to the counsel, if requested.

¶38

Sd/- C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE .

¶39

Sd/- R. NARAYANA PISHARADI, JUDGE .

¶40

ul/-

¶41

[True copy]

¶42

P.S. to Judge.

V.O.Ouseph v. State of Kerala and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.O.Ouseph v. State of Kerala and Another

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

Prabhakaran.T Vs Devu.P.K

Abdul Jamal, Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Jamal, Vs State of Kerala

Leelavathyamma Vs Vimalakumaryamma

Ramakrishnan Vs Alli

Remani.P.a Vs Alwaye Chitties and Finances Pvt.Ltd