IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 7TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 16TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 27569 of 2010(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- ANTONY KURIAN, NJAVALLIL HOUSE, CHATHANGATT ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI-682 025. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KURIAN SRI.MATHEW B. KURIAN SRI.K.T.THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY, (LAND REFORMS), ALAPPUZHA-1. 2. THE ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, SOUTHERN REGION, OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, VANASREE COMPLEX, CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM, PINCODE-695 001. 3. SMT.MARYKUTTY KANAKASYAN, W/O.LATE KOSHY KANAKASYAN, THAZHAYIL PUTHEN MADOM, KOVILKADAVU, SAHAYAGIRI P.O., MARAYOOR, DEVIKULAM, PINCODE-685 620. 4. SRI.SUDHAKARAN KANAKASYAN, S/O.LTE KOSHY KANAKASYAN, DO. 5. SMT.SAUDAMINI KANAKASYAN, D/O.LATE KOSHY KANAKASYAN, DO. 6. KOSHY KANAKASIAN, S/O.LATE KOSHY KANAKASIAN, DO. 7. ARYAN (VALSAN, S/O.LATE KOZHY KANAKASIAN, DO. WPC NO.27569/10 -2- 8. SOUMITHRI, D/O.LATE KANAKASIAN, DO. 9. BHAGATHEYI, D/O.LTE KANAKASIAN, DO. 10. KANAKASIAN (BIJU), S/O.LATE KANAKASIAN, DO. 11. JAYAMOL, D/O.LATE KANAKASIAN, DO. 12. GOPAKUMAR, S/O.LATE KANAKASIAN, DO. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.POULOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 27569 OF 2010 (U) ===================== Dated this the 7th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T Heard the counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and Adv.Sri.Shivasankar appearing for R3 to 12. 2. According to the petitioner, he is the exclusive owner of the property covered by Ext.P1 document. It is stated that subsequently, he came to know that the predecessor of respondents 3 to 12 obtained patta and paid the tax in respect of the very same property. Petitioner states that thereupon he filed appeal against the grant of patta in favour of the predecessor of respondents 3 to 12, which is pending consideration of the 1st respondent. It is stated that pursuant to the directions of this Court, the petition seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal has been allowed and the stay petition is still pending. In the meanwhile, petitioner apprehends that the 2nd respondent is taking steps to disburse the value of the sandal wood extracted from the land in question on a claim made by respondents 3 to 12. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition has been filed WPC No. 27569/10 :2 : praying for a direction to the 1st respondent to expeditiously dispose of the appeal filed by him and in the meanwhile to direct the 2nd respondent not to disburse the value of the sandal wood extracted. 3. Evidently, therefore, the claim of the petitioner is one of title over the property in question, which if allowed, will certainly have an impact on the claim of respondents 3 to 12 for disbursal of the value payable on the sandal wood extracted from the property. Therefore, if before the disposal of the appeal, the value payable is disbursed, that will prejudicially affect the petitioner. In that view of the matter, I am inclined to direct the appellate authority to expeditiously dispose of the appeal keeping further proceedings for disbursement of the value of the sandal wood in abeyance. 4. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner with notice to respondents 3 to 12 and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 8 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. In the meanwhile, it is directed that the 2nd respondent shall not WPC No. 27569/10 :3 : disburse the value of the sandal wood payable extracted from the land in respect of which the aforesaid appeal is filed by the petitioner. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before respondents 1 and 2 for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp