IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2011 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1933 CRP.No. 730 of 2007() ------------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 25/05/2006 IN EP. NO.372/ 2003 IN LAR.1149/1988 of I ADDL.SUB COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): /2ND J.D./RESPONDENT -------------------------------------------------------------------- DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, COCHIN EXPORT PROCESSING ZONE, (NOW CALLED COCHIN SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE), KAKKANAD, KOCHI-682 037. BY ADV. SRI.MOHAN C.MENON RESPONDENT(S): 1ST JUDG. DEBTOR ------------------------------------------------------- 1. P.A.KURUVILLA (DIED), CHOOLAKKAL PUTHENVEETTIL, MARKET ROAD, ERNAKULAM. 2. AUGUSTINE KURUVILLA @ RAJAN KURUVILLA, S/O. LATE P.A.KURUVILLA, CHOOLAKKAL PUTHENVEETTIL, MARKET ROAD, ERNAKULAM. 3. THOMAS KURUVILLA, S/O. LATE P.A.KURUVILLA, -DO- -DO- 4. THANKAMMA KURUVILLA, W/O. LATE P.A.KURUVILLA, -DO- -DO- 5. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. R2 TO R4 BY ADVS. RRI.V.V.ASOKAN, SMT.S.AMINA . THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss P. BHAVADASAN, J. ........................................... C.R.P.NO.730 OF 2007 ............................................. Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2011. JUDGMENT This revision petition is directed against the order dated 25.5.2006 in E.P.No.372/2003 in LAR.No.1149/1988. It seems that the lands belonging to respondents 1 to 4 were acquired on the requisition made by the Cochin Export Processing Zone, which is the Requisitioning Authority. An award was passed and was put in execution. The respondents herein filed E.P.No.372/2003. 2. The contention of the petitioner is that the Requisitioning Authority had entered appearance in the execution proceedings and pointed that no further amounts are due and without considering the objections, the impugned order has been passed. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents pointed out that they are entitled to all statutory rights and that has to be taken note of by the court below. 4. Whatever that be, the order now assailed is cryptic and does not refer to the objections filed by the petitioner. C.R.P.NO.730 OF 2007 : 2 : As to whether the objections are sustainable or not is a different matter. At any rate, the execution court was bound to consider the objections filed by the Requisitioning Authority before directing deposit of the amount. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Sub Court, Ernakulam for fresh consideration in accordance with law ensuring that the decree holders are entitled to all statutory benefits as per the Act. Sd/= P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE. cl /true copy/ P.A. to Judge.