Disposed

Sasi Kumar, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Jan 2019WP(C)/881/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In W.P(C)No.881 of 2019, the petitioner sought directions for payment of enhanced compensation under a land acquisition award. The High Court directed the respondents to disburse 30% of the total due within four months and release the balance in six equated instalments thereafter, citing prior judgments in similar matters.

What did the court decide?

Direct the respondents to disburse 30% of the total due compensation within four months and release the balance in six equated monthly instalments thereafter.

Sasi Kumar, Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

FRIDAY ,THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 21ST POUSHA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 881 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SASI KUMAR, MALAYALA RAJYOM BUILDINGS, PULIMOOD, PUTHENCHANDA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.BASANT BALAJI ANJALI .S

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶11

2 THE SECRETARY, TRIDA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶12

SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY,SR.GOVT.PLEADER FOR R1 , SRI.K.A.JALEEL SC FOR R2

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

W.P(C)No.881 of 2019

¶15

¶16

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶17

===========================

¶18

W.P(C)No.881 of 2019

¶19

===========================

¶20

Dated this the 11^th day of January, 2019

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

The prayers in the above Writ Petition (Civil) are as follows:

¶23

“ 1) A Writ of Mandamus, order or direction be passed directing the respondents to deposit the total amount of enhanced compensation in court due under E.P 654/2008 in LAR 248/2006 on the file of the II Addl Sub Judge Thiruvananthapuram within a time to be fixed by this hon'ble court.

¶24

2) Such other relief's that are appropriate and incidental to this writ petition.”

¶25

Heard Sri.Basant Balaji, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned counsel appearing for R-1 and Sri.K.Jaleel, learned Standing Counsel for TRIDA, appearing for R-2.

¶26

The petitioner, who is a claimant in Land Acquisition Reference LAR No.248/2006 on the file of the Court of the IInd Additional Sub Judge, Thiruvananthapuram, he is aggrieved by the long delay on the part of the respondents in paying the due compensation amount in respect of his property, which has been acquired long ago under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act,

¶27

W.P(C)No.881 of 2019

¶28

¶29

1894 and inspite of Ext.P-1 Execution Petition filed quite some time ago. The award of the LAR Court has been modified as per Ext.P-1 Appellate judgment dated 03.11.2011 rendered by this Court in Land Acquisition Appeal No.218/2009 arising out LAR No.248/2006. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed revised calculation statement as per Ext.P-3 dated 28.05.2018, pursuant to the modifications made as per Ext.P-1 Appellate judgment. The petitioner places reliance from various judgments of this Court, including the one as per Ext.P-5 judgment rendered on 29.11.2018 in W.P(C)No.38736/2018 and the judgment in W.P(C)No.11504/2017 referred to therein, in the matter of directions issued by this Court in similar cases to the respondent to make the payments to the due amounts in the time lines mentioned therein.

¶30

Accordingly, taking note of the facts and circumstances of this case and also following the directions issued by this Court in Ext.P-5 judgment dated 29.11.2018 in W.P(C)No.38736/2018, it is ordered that the respondents will immediately disburse 30% of the total due amount of the petitioner in the abovesaid land acquisition proceedings, within a period of four months from the date of production of a certified copy of the judgment and thereafter they shall release the balance due amounts to the petitioner in six equated

¶31

¶32

¶33

monthly instalments succeeding the first instalment. It is made clear that in case, any deviance is made by the respondents in respect of the abovesaid time line, then it is for the petitioner to immediately approach the Execution Court concerned in Ext.P-2 E.P, so as to ensure that the said execution petition is finally disposed of by the Execution Court, without much delay and to ensure the payment of the due amounts.

¶34

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

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE

vgd/14.01.19

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶42

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 03.11.2011 IN LAA 218/2009 FILED AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN LAR 248/2006.

¶43

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER AS E.P.NO.654/2008 IN LAR 248/2006 DATED 03.10.2008 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. SUB JUDGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶44

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT FILED IN E.P.NO.654/2008.

¶45

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DATED 27.11.2018 GIVEN BY DR.OLIVER JAMES.

¶46

EXHIBIT P5

¶47

TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 29.11.2018 W.P.(C) NO.38736 OF 2018.

Sasi Kumar, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sasi 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Joseph Kurian Vs the District Collector

Valliammal Vs the District Collector

Joseph George Vs State of Kerala

Mouvanal Kalyani Vs State of Kerala

Beegum Benazir Vs Registrar of Births and Deaths