IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2010 / 10TH ASHADHA 1932 LA.App..No.2115 of 2008 (C) --------------------------------- LAR.354/2000 of ADDL.SUB COURT, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S): LEGAL HEIRS OF 4TH CLAIMANTS/SUPPL.APPELLANTS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. KARAKAT PUTHIYAPURAYIL MAMMAD KUNHI(DIED AROLI, P.O.MANAKADAVU, PAPPINISSERI VILLAGE, KANNUR DISTRICT. * 2. PACHARENTAKATH PURAYIL JAMEELA, W/O.LATE KARAKAT PUTHIYAPURAYIL MAMMAD KUNHI, AROLI, P.O.MANAKADAVU, PAPPINISSERI VILLAGE, KANNUR DISTRICT.[DIED] 3. SUMAYYA, D/O.LATE KARAKAT PUTHIYAPURAYIL MAMMAD KUNHI, AROLI P.O.MANAKADAVU, PAPPINISSERI VILLAGE, KANNUR DISTRICT. 4. JUNAISE, S/O.LATE KARAKAT PUTHIYAPURAYIL MAMMAD KUNHI, AROLI, P.O.MANAKADAVU, PAPPINISSERI VILLAGE, KANNUR DISTRICT. 5. JAMSHEER, S/O.LATE KARAKAT PUTHIYAPURAYIL MAMMAD KUNHI, AROLI, P.O.MANAKADAVU, PAPPINISSERI VILLAGE, KANNUR DISTRICT. 6. JAMSHAD, S/O.LATE KARAKAT PUTHIYAPURAYIL MAMMAD KUNHI, AROLI, P.O.MANAKADAVU, PAPPINISSERI VILLAGE, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.PAREETH LAA.2115/08 -2- RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANTS 1 TO 3 AND 5/RESPONDENTS ------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. PULLUVAN VALAPPIL KALLAYANI, PULLUVAN VALAPPIL HOUSE, IRINAVU P.O., KALLIASSERI, KANNUR DISTRICT. ** 2. KOZHUMMAL SREEDHARAN, PULLUVAN VALAPPIL HOUSE, IRINAVU PO, KALLIASSERI, KANNUR DISTRICT. [DELETED] ** 3. KOZHUMMAL YESHODA, PULLUVAN VALAPIL HOUSE, IRINAVU P.O., KALLIASSERI, KANNUR DISTRICT. [DELETED] 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR. SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LATHA T. THANKAPPAN *[IT IS RECORDED THAT 2ND APPELLANT IS DEAD AND THE OTHER APPELLANTS ARE RECORDED AS LEGAL HEIRS OF THE DECEASED 2ND APPELLANT VIDE ORDER DT.24/06/10 IN I.A.2217/10] **[RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 ARE DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AT THE RISK OF THE APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS VIDE ORDER DT.25/08/09 IN I.A.2981/09] THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ L. A. A. No.2115 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 1st day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J The appellant is the fourth claimant in LAR.354/2000 on the files of the Land Acquisition Court, Thalassery. The above LAR was a reference under Section 30 in respect of a total amount of Rs.3,21,917/- deposited before the Reference Court as compensation for a total extent of 1.153 hectors corresponding to 284 cents acquired for the purpose of Kannur Power Project. The Land Acquisition Officer passed award in favour of four claimants including the appellants who are the legal heirs of the fourth claimant. The reference under Section 30 became necessary as none of L. A. A. No.2115 of 2008 -2- the claimants produced proper documents of title and possession before the Awarding Officer. However, award was passed by the LAO in favour of the claimants on the reason that the property was taken over from their possession. Before the Reference Court, the appellant alone entered appearance and filed claim statement. Appellant unlike the other claimants participated in the enquiry. Appellant produced Exts.A1 and A2. Ext.A1 was a title document where the survey number was shown differently. Ext.A2 was a basic tax receipt where the survey number is shown correctly. Significantly, under both Exts.A1 and A2, the extent of property in the possession of the appellant is only 92 cents. The learned Subordinate Judge took the view that as Exts.A1 and A2 do not pertain to the entire extent and as L. A. A. No.2115 of 2008 -3- there is survey number discrepancy in Ext.A1, not even a portion of the amount can be released to the appellant. What the court did was to direct release of the entire amount to the Government. 2. We are not in a position to approve the action of the learned Subordinate Judge. It was never the stand of the Government that the Government is having any interest in the property under acquisition. If that was the Government's stand, it was absolutely unnecessary for the Government to have initiated proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act. Reference under Section 30 became necessary as the awardees did not establish their title and possession. We feel that Exts.A1 and A2 read conjointly supports the appellants' claim over a portion of the property under acquisition i.e. 92 cents. In the absence of L. A. A. No.2115 of 2008 -4- contest by the other claimants, the court below could have directed release of a portion of the compensation to the appellant. We therefore, interfere with the impugned judgment and direct the release of a sum of Rs.1,06,874/- from out of the compensation under deposit to the appellant in full and final settlement of the appellants' claim over the acquired property. The appeal will stand allowed to that extent only. Parties are directed to suffer their respective costs. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE C. K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE kns/- L. A. A. No.2115 of 2008 -5- PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ C. M. Application No.2158 of 2008 in L. A. A. No.2115 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 25th day of August, 2009 ORDER Pius C. Kuriakose, J This is an application for condonation of delay. Condonation of delay is very stiffly opposed by the Government Pleader. The averments in the affidavit cannot be said to be fully convincing. However, on consideration that causes should be adjudicated on merits rather than decided on technicalities we are inclined to condone the delay, however, only on very strict conditions. The application will stand allowed and the delay will stand condoned subject to the following conditions:- L. A. A. No.2115 of 2008 -6- 1) The appellants/petitioners pay a sum of Rs.1,500/- by way of cost to the Government through the Office of the Advocate General within two weeks from today. 2) The appellants/petitioner pay a further amount of Rs.1,500/- to the Kerala Mediation Centre through its Nodal Officer within the same period as mentioned above. Once the Registry notices receipt against payment of both the amounts, the appeal will be sent up for admission. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE K. SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE L. A. A. No.2115 of 2008 -7- kns/-