IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH AUGUST 2009 / 4TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 24555 of 2009(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------- SMT.GUNASUNDARI, W/O.KALIRAJAN, AGED 42 YEARS SOORYA BHAVAN, AMBILAT VILLAGE, NIRMALAGIRI POST KUTHUPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.KHALID SRI.N.GOPINATHA PANICKER SRI.T.P.SAJID RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR LAND ACUQISITION , MATTANNUR AIRPORT NO.3 MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR. 3. GURUNANTHAN, AGED 46 YEARS S/O.THANKARAJA NADAR, SREE NILAYAM,MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. 4. GANESH MOORTHI, AGED 48 YEARS S/O. THANKARAJA NADAR, SREE NILAYAM,MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.I.V.PRAMOD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.24555 of 2009-L = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 26th day of August, 2009. JUDGMENT Notice to respondents 3 and 4 is dispensed with preserving their right to seek rehearing of this writ petition, if aggrieved. Learned Government Pleader takes notice for respondents 1 and 2. An item of land was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act. According to the petitioner, she is also entitled to a share following the law of succession and certain agreements held by her. She says that she is also a heir of the person to whom the land originally belonged and who is now no more. These are issues which could be considered only by a reference court in terms of the LA Act. Apparently, the claim made by the petitioner cannot be demonstrated with reference to any registered document. This situation WP(C)24555/09 -: 2 :- appears to have weighed with the Collector under the Act to assume that she has no documentary evidence for the claim made by her. Under such circumstances, it is ordered that the petitioner's application, Ext.P4, will be taken up for consideration and if the rival claim to title is not resolved on consensus, the matter has to go to the Reference Court under Section 31 of the LA Act. In such event, it shall be ensured that the amounts are not disbursed by the Tahsildar and that shall be deposited before the Reference Court. Let it be so done. Writ petition is ordered accordingly. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/280809