Allowed

Rejimon v. C.v.Joychan @ Kochuvarky John

Kerala HC14 Oct 2019OP(C)/1362/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a petition challenging an order by the Appellate Authority (Land Reforms) that condoned a delay in filing an appeal. The Court held that an opportunity of hearing was not given to the petitioner and set aside the order, directing a fresh decision with a hearing. Quality: ok

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; Appellate Authority directed to dispose of I.A.69/2012 afresh after hearing.

Rejimon Vs C.v.Joychan @ Kochuvarky John — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 22ND ASWINA, 1941

¶5

OP(C).No.1362 OF 2018(O)

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OTHERS 32/2012 OF APPELLATE AUTHORITY (LR), ALAPPUZHA

¶7

PETITIONER/ADDL.2ND RESPONDENT:

¶8

REJIMON S/O JOSEPH K.X, KARIYIL VEEDU, VARANAD PO, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA-688539, R/BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, ROBYMON JOSEPH, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O JOSEPH K.X, KARIYIL VEEDU, VARANAD PO,CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA-688539.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.JOBY CYRIAC

¶10

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND 1ST RESPONDENT:

¶11

1 C.V.JOYCHAN @ KOCHUVARKY JOHN S/O KOCHUVARKY, CHENNOTH HOUSE, C.M.C 27,CHERTHALA PO, ALAPPUZHA-688524.

¶12

2 VARKEY MATHEW VARAKKATTU, KALAVANIYIL VEEDU, VARANADU PO,KOKOTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA-688539.

¶13

R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VENUGOPALAN R2 BY ADV. SRI.D.SREENATH

¶14

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

-2-

¶16

OP(C).No.1362 OF 2018(O)

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The second respondent purchased nine cents of property comprised in Survey No.167/15-2 of Kokkothamangalam Village as per Ext.P1 purchase certificate on 07.07.1997.

¶19

Thereafter on 24.01.2007, the petitioner purchased the said property as per Ext.P2 sale deed. The first respondent herein filed an appeal as A.A.32/2012 before the Appellate Authority (Land Reforms, Alappuzha), challenging the above said purchase certificate. The above said purchase certificate was issued as per suo motu proceeding No.3/1994. Along with the appeal, the first respondent herein filed I.A.69/2012 before the Appellate Authority praying for condoning the delay of

¶20

-3-

¶21

OP(C).No.1362 OF 2018(O)

¶22

14 years 9 months and 22 days in filing the appeal. The Appellate Authority as per Ext.P6 order allowed the said application, against which this original petition has been filed.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that even though the petitioner purchased the property as early as on 24.01.2007, Ext.P6 order was passed without granting an opportunity to the petitioner of being heard and in the circumstances, Ext.P6 order is not sustainable.

¶24

It appears that the petitioner purchased the

¶25

property on 24.01.2007 as per Ext.P2 sale deed. The appeal was filed before the Appellate Authority only in the year 2012, which was nearly after five years of purchasing the property by the petitioner. In the said circumstances, it was only just and proper to grant an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before passing

¶26

-4-

¶27

OP(C).No.1362 OF 2018(O)

¶28

Ext.P6 order. Since Ext.P6 order was passed without affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, Ext.P6 order cannot be said to be legal, proper and correct and consequently, I set aside the same.

¶29

In the result, this original petition stands allowed, setting aside Ext.P6 order and the Appellate Authority is directed to dispose of I.A.69/2012 afresh in accordance with law, after affording opportunity of hearing to all the affected parties, including the petitioner herein.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

JUDGE

Nkr/15.10.19

-5-

OP(C).No.1362 OF 2018(O)

¶36

APPENDIX

¶37

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶38

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PURCHASE CERTIFICATE DATED 14.10.1997 ISSUED BY SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LR) CHERTHALA IN FAVOUR OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.234/2007 OF SRO, CHERTHALA. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 20.12.2010 WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY COVERED BY EXT.P3. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM NO.AA NO.32/2012 DATED 28.05.2012.

¶39

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE FRESH AFFIDAVIT DATED 28.09.2016 FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN SUPPORT OF I.A NO.69/2012(FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY)

¶40

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 8.3.2017 IN I.A NO.69/2012 IN AA NO.32/2012. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE RECEIVED ALONG WITH COPY OF I.A NO.21/2018 (IMPLEADING PETITION) DATED 26.2.2018 AND APPEAL MEMORANDUM IN AA NO.32/2012.

¶41

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER IN I.A NO.81/2015 AND 82/2015 IN AA NO.32/2012 DATED 17.8.2016 OF THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY (LAND REFORMS) ALAPPUZHA.

¶42

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

¶43

EXHIBIT R-1(a) TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE TAHSILDAR, LAND TRIBUNAL, CHERTHALA

¶44

-6-

¶45

OP(C).No.1362 OF 2018(O)

¶46

EXHIBIT R-1(b) TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS PREPARED BY THE REVENUE INSPECTOR ON 12.12.1993.

¶47

EXHIBIT R-1(C) TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 7/7/1997 PASSED BY THE LAND TRIBUNAL, CHERTHALA

Rejimon v. C.v.Joychan @ Kochuvarky John

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rejimon v. C.v.Joychan @ Kochuvarky John

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

Usha Vs Thajudheen

Gopinathan Vs Muthoot Vehicles and Asset Finance Ltd.

Rajendrakumar K Vs Antony

Mariyamma Varghese Vs South Indian Bank Limited

Rincy E.Varghese, Vs Abin Babu

Sheeja Kumari Vs Thankamma