Allowed

Nalupurapattil Hassainar v. the Special Tahsildar, Laa

Kerala HC16 Jul 2019LA.App./91/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the Land Acquisition Appeal against the dismissal of reference case LAR 18/2010 due to claimants' non-appearance. Considering a previous remand, the court remanded the reference for fresh consideration and disposal after affording opportunity to claimants to adduce evidence.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment set aside; reference case remanded to Sub Court for fresh consideration after allowing claimants to adduce evidence.

Nalupurapattil Hassainar Vs the Special Tahsildar, Laa — 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

TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 25TH ASHADHA, 1941

¶7

LA.App..No.91 of 2015

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 15-10-2012 IN LAR 18/2010 of SUB COURT, HOSDRUG

¶9

APPELLANTS/CLAIMANTS:

¶10

1 NALUPURAPATTIL HASSAINAR @ HUSSAINAR, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O.MAMMUNHI, 'ASKAR MANZIL', KUSHAL NAGAR, HOSDURG VILLAGE, KANHANGAD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶11

2 NALUPURAPATTIL ABDUL RAHIMAN AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.MAMMUNHI, 'ASKAR MANZIL', KUSHAL NAGAR, HOSDURG VILLAGE, KANHANGAD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS

¶13

RESPONDENTS/REFERRING OFFICER & RESPONDENTS:

¶14

1 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, L.A. VIDYANAGAR P.O., KASARAGOD-671 123.

¶15

2 THE TAHSILDAR HOSDURG, PIN-671 315.

¶16

3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR VIDYA NAGAR P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671 123.

¶17

BY ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶18

THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

LAA No.91/2015

¶20

-2-

¶21

C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J. & R. NARAYANA PISHARADI, J.

¶22

L.A.A No. 91 OF 2015

¶23

DATED THIS THE 16^th DAY OF JULY, 2019

¶24

J U D G M E N T

¶25

Abdul Rehim, J:

¶26

Challenge in this appeal is against judgment of the Subordinate Judge's court, Hosdurg in LAR 18/2010, to the extent it dismissed the reference, which was made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.

¶27

It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant that, the reference case happened to be dismissed because the claimants could not appear before the court when the case was listed for trial. It is further pointed out that another reference made under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act with respect to the very same acquisition, LAR 3/2010 was also rejected by the very same court. It is further pointed out that an appeal filed against the judgment in LAR 3/2010 was allowed by this court in LAA 839/2013 and the reference case was remanded back to the court below, on opportunity afforded to the appellants to adduce evidence. The judgment in LAA 839/2013 is produced for our perusal.

¶28

LAA No.91/2015 -3-

¶29

Heard; counsel for the appellant and Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. Under the above mentioned circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that interest of justice can be achieved by remanding LAR 18/2010 also to be tried by the reference court, in view of the remand made with respect to LAR 3/2010.

¶30

Hence the above appeal is hereby allowed. The impugned judgment of the reference court in LAR 18/2010 is hereby set aside. The reference case is remanded to the Sub Court for fresh consideration and disposal, after affording opportunity to the claimants to adduce evidence. The parties shall appear before the court below on 06-08-2019.

¶31

Eligible refund of court fee shall be made on the basis of the remand.

Sd/-

C.K.ABDUL REHIM

JUDGE

Sd/-

R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶37

JUDGE

¶38

AMG

Nalupurapattil Hassainar v. the Special Tahsildar, Laa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nalupurapattil Hassainar v. the Special Tahsildar, Laa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Vice-Chancellor Vs the City Policecommissioner

Dr.P.P.Dileepkumar Vs the Commissioner of Police

Kerala State Warehousing Corporation Vs the Commissioner of Income Tax

Centre for Consumer Education, Vs State of Kerala

Sobha Ltd. (Formerly Sobha Developers Ltd.) Vs the Asst. Commissioner (Works Contract)

Klassic Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs Indtech Interiors and Constructions Pvt. Ltd.