This judge allowed a review petition in a land acquisition case. The petition contested a judgment that directed 50% compensation payment. The court recalled the original judgment to align with a recent stay order in connected appeals.
Review petition allowed; original judgment recalled.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 30TH VAISAKHA, 1944
RP NO. 348 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP(C) 1425/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER/S:
SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA)RAILWAYS
SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) RAILWAYS,KAYAMKULAM, PIN -
690106
BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER
RESPONDENT/S:
1SULOCHANA
AGED 51 YEARS
W/O SASIDARAN NAIR,KARUMADY PATHIL,PADINJARE
MURI,AMBALAPUZHA,ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688561
2DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER(CONSTRUCTION II)
CONSTRUCTIONS II ,RAILWAYS, KAYAMKULAM, PIN - 682016
BY ADV A.KRISHNAN
OTHER PRESENT:
GP Venugopal V
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
RP NO. 348 OF 2022
2
O R D E R
Dated this the 20th day of May, 2022
This review petition is filed pointing out that subsequent to the judgment of this Court, the Government has preferred Land Acquisition Appeals challenging the awards which are sought to be executed by the original petitioner. It is submitted that in connected appeals, this court has stayed the execution, subject to the Government depositing 50% of the compensation amount, with proportionate interest and cost, before the Authority within 60 days. The claimant has also been given the liberty to move the Authority for withdrawal of the deposited amount in accordance with law.
2.Learned Government Pleader points out that, since this court has stipulated a time limit for disposal of the execution petition, appeal in this case has not been brought up for consideration. It is submitted that it would be beneficial for the claimant also, if an order, as in the other appeals, is passed in his case.
RP NO. 348 OF 2022
3
view of the fact that, while admitting the appeals and granting stay, this court is directing payment of 50% of the compensation amount.
In that view of the matter, the review petition is allowed and the judgment is recalled.
Sd/-
V.G ARUN JUDGE
SJ
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the review petition challenging a judgment ordering 50% compensation payment pending appeal is maintainable.
Special Tahsildar (LA) Railways, Kayamkulam
Sulochana
Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction II), Railways, Kayamkulam
V.G. ARUN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court