IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 10145 of 2010(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- K.I.KUMARAN, S/O.LATE ITTIYATHI, AGED 86 YEARS, KANNANVELIKKAL HOUSE, EAST KADATHI KARA, VELLOORKUNNAM VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.RAMNATH SRI.P.RAJESH(KOTTAKKAL) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SREEKUMARA BHAJANA DEVASWOM REPRESENTED BY THE UNION SECRETARY SNDP, MUVATTUPUZHA SRI.P.N.PRABHA. 2. NARAYANAN NAMBOOTHIRI, THENKODATHU MANA, KAKKAD KARA (DIED). 3. DEVASENA ANTHARJANAM, M/O.NARAYANAN NAMBOOTHIRI, THENKODATHU MANA, KAKKAD KARA (DIED). 4. ARYA DEVI ANTHARJANAM, W/O.NARAYANAN NAMBOOTHIRI, THENKODATHU MANA, KAKKAD KARA, MEKKADAMPU. 5. NARAYANAN NAMBOOTHIRI, S/O.NARAYANAN NAMBOOTHIRI, THENKODATHU MANA, KAKKAD KARA. 6. MURALI, S/O.NARAYANAN NAMBOOTHIRI, THENKODATHU MANA, KAKKAD KARA (DIED). 7. BHADRA DEVI ANTHARJANAM, D/O.NARAYANAN NAMBOOTHIRI, THENKODATHU MANA, KAKKAD KARA. WP(C).No. 10145 of 2010(P) 8. SREEVANJAN, S/O.LATE GOPALAKRISHNAN, KANNAMVELICKAL, MUVATTUPUZHA P.O. 9. VINOD, S/O.LATE GOPALAKRISHNAN, KANNAMVELICKAL, MUVATTUPUZHA P.O. 10. BEENA, W/O.RAVI, THECHIYATHU MYALIL, NEDUMGAPRA P.O., PANACHIYAM VIA, PERUMBAVOOR. 11. PUSHPA, W/O.LATE KRISHNAN KUTTY, KANNAMVELICKAL, MUVATTUPUZHA P.O. 12. DEEPU, D/O.LATE KRISHNAN KUTTY, KANNAMVELICKAL, MUVATTUPUZHA P.O. 13. VISHNU, S/O.LATE KRISHNAN KUTTY, KANNAMVELICKAL, MUVATTUPUZHA P.O. 14. NEETHU, W/O.SUNIL KUMAR, KANNAMVELICKAL, MUVATTUPUZHA P.O. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.10145 of 2010 - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 31st day of March, 2010. JUDGMENT This writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P9 order passed by the Land Reforms Appellate Authority whereby the abatement of the appeal is set aside and delay in impleading the legal heirs has been condoned, and the impleading of additional respondents 9 to 15 is allowed. 2. Mainly it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the order is passed without considering the sufficiency of the explanation offered. It is further pointed out that the legal heirs of the deceased Gopalakrishnan even though were sought to be impleaded, they were not issued any notice by the Appellate Authority before passing the order and, therefore, there is a fatal defect in the proceedings. 3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent who is the appellant before the Land Reforms Appellate Authority. W.P.(C) No.10145 of 2010 2 4. The second respondent in the appeal, K.I.Gopalakrishnan died on 7/4/2007, pending the appeal. Respondents 8 to 14 herein are the legal heirs of the deceased who were proposed to be impleaded in the appeal before the Land Reforms Appellate Authority. The Land Reforms Appellate Authority by the impugned order allowed the application by condoning the delay also. 5. The learned counsel for the first respondent also submitted that notices have not been issued to the legal heirs proposed to be impleaded in the appeal. In that view, Ext.P9 cannot survive and the same is quashed. 6. Therefore, there will be a direction to the Appellate Authority to proceed in accordance with law after issuing notice to all the parties. Appropriate steps will be taken as expeditiously as possible. The writ petition is allowed as above. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge skj