IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2008 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1930 CRP.No. 1093 of 2007() ---------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20/12/2006 IN EP.164/04 IN LAR.66/1993 of PRL.SUB COURT,KOTTAYAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER: JUDGMENT DEBTOR: ---------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER RESPONDENT: DECREE HOLDER: --------------------------- K. KURIAN, CASHEW ESTATE, ADUTHALA P.O., KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.PATHROSE MATTHAI (SR.) SRI.SAJI VARGHESE SMT.MARIAM MATHAI THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON IA 3118/07 IN C.R.P 1093/07 DISMISSED 25.3.08 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE. M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- C.R.P. NO. 1093 OF 2007 --------------------- Dated this the 25th day of March, 2008 ORDER This civil revision petition is preferred against the one sentence order passed in EP 164/04 in LAR 66/93, by the Principal Sub Judge, Kottayam, fixing the balance amount due as Rs. 1,29,715/- . 2. I do not find any materials either to support or reject the same. Therefore this court is left with only one alternative remedy i.e. to set aside the order and direct the court below to consider the matter afresh. The decree holder as well as the judgment debtor is directed to file separate statements and raise their objections in accordance with the principles laid down by the Apex court in various decisions regarding the entitlement to compensation and calculation of compensation. 3. Therefore the order under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the court below for fresh consideration. Parties are directed to appear before the court below on 29.5.08. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps