IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2008 / 28TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 24914 of 2008(N) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED / / IN & LAR.171/1994 IN LAR.23/2007 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER: ------------ P.SREEKUMARAN NAIR, NPP HOUSE NO.1, PALKULANGARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. P.K.SREEKANTAN, S/O.N.PARAMESWARAN PILLAI, ANUGRAHA, TC 29/1090(4), PALKULANGARA DEVI TEMPLE, WEST NADA, PETTAH P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-34 2. K.PUSHYALAKSHMY AMMA, D/O.N.PARAMESWARAN PILLAI, NPP HOUSE NO.4, PALKULANGARA, CHAMPAKADA- MEELUMIKKU ROAD, PETTAH P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-24. 3. K.RAJALEKSHMY AMMA, SHARIKA, TC 29/830(1), PALKULANGARA, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-8. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ........................................... WP(C).No. 24914 OF 2008 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 19th DAY OF AUGUST, 2008 JUDGMENT This petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India by the second respondent in I.A.476 of 2008 in in LAR 23 of 2007 on the file of Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram. Ext.P15 order was passed by Sub Judge, Thiruvananthapuram in Ext.P13 application(IA 476 of 2008). The prayer in Ext.P13 is to call for the records in LAR 171 of 1994 and tag it with LAR 23 of 2007 and to try both the cases together. Under Ext.P15 order, learned Sub Judge allowed the application as follows:- “ Heard. No prejudice is likely to be caused to second respondent. Hence prayer for joint trial allowed as prayed for”. 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that LAR 171 of 1994 was disposed by Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram under Ext.P1 judgment and that judgment was challenged before this court in LAA 109 of 2001 and Ext.P2 WP(C) 24914/2008 2 judgment was challenged before Supreme Court in Civil Appeal 5354 of 2006 and under Ext.P3 judgment it was disposed and while disposing the appeal, opportunity was granted to appellants to make an application before the competent Land Acquisition Authority for a reference in terms of Section 30 of the Act and LAR 171 of 1994 is finally disposed under Ext.P3 and therefore Sub Judge should not have directed joint trial of that case with LAR 23 of 2007. 3. In view of the order to be passed in this petition, I do not find it necessary to issue notice to other claimants, who are the petitioners in Ext.P13 application. 4. Opposing Ext.P13 application, petitioner filed Ext.P14 objection raising the contentions that LAR 171 of 1994 was disposed and it cannot be reopened and therefore joint trial is not possible. Unfortunately, learned Sub Judge did not consider this aspect and allowed the application on the ground that no prejudice will be caused. When Ext.P1 judgment shows LAR 171 of 1994 was disposed and evidence by Ext.P2 and P3 judgments in the appeal show that appeals are also disposed, the objection should have been considered. Ext.P15 order is therefore quashed. Sub Judge, Thiruvananthapuram is directed to WP(C) 24914/2008 3 reconsider EA 476 of 2008 in the light of Ext.P14 objection filed by petitioner and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE lgk/-