IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER THURSDAY, THE 27TH AUGUST 2009 / 5TH BHADRA 1931 WA.No. 1898 of 2009 --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.18392/2008 Dated 17/07/2009 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: -------------------------- KERALA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION, HEAD OFFICE, ERNAKULAM, WAREHOUSING CORPORATION ROAD, P.B.NO.1727, KOCHI-16, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ADV. SRI.MAJNU KOMATH, SC, K.S.W.C. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLCTOR, ALAPPUZHA. 3. THANKAMMA HORMESE THARAKAN, W/O. P.K.HORMESE THARAKAN, AYYANATTUPARAYIL, THYKATTUSERRI. 4. P.K.GEORGE THARAKAN S/O. KUNJAVIRA THARAKAN AYYANATTUPARAYIL(MIDDLE) THYKATTUSERRI VILLAG, CHERTHALA TALUK. 5. MRS. PENNAMMA ABRAHAM THARAKAN, W/O. LATE P.K.ABRAHAM THARAKAN, AYYANATTUPARAYIL VADAKKEVEEDU, THYKATTUSSERI. 6. P.A.THOMAS THARAKAN, S/O. P.A.ABRAHAM THARAKAN OF DO-DO- 7. P.A.GEORGE THARAKAN, S/O. DO- DO- DO- 8. P.A.ANTONY THARAKAN S/O. DO-DO- 9. EBBY ABRAHAM, S/O. P.A.ABRAHAM THARAKAN OF DO-DO- 10. P.H.GEORGE THARAKAN PARAYIL BHAVAN, NELLIMETTOM. WA NO.1898/09 11. P.H.MATHEW THARAKAN, AYYANATTU PARAYIL THYKATTUSSERY. 12. P.H.PAUL THARAKAN, OF DO-DO- 13. MRS. MARIAMMA XAVIER OF DO-DO- 14. MRS. ROSAMMA CHERIAN OF DO-DO- 15. MRS. MARIAMMA ABRAHAM THARAKAN OF DO-DO- 16. HORMISE ABRAHAM THARAKAN OF DO-DO- 17. MOLLY PRATHAP THARAKAN AYYANATTUPURAYIL, CHERTHALA. 18. ROSY THOMAS, OF DO-DO- 19. P.ABRAHAM THARAKAN OF DO-DO- 20. RANI JOSE OF DO-DO- 21. ANNAMMA HORMISE THARAKAN, DO-DO- 22. MEEMY R.THOMAS OF DO-DO- 23. P.H.HORMISE THARAKAN OF DO-DO- 24. ANNU HORMISE, DO-DO- 25. P.G.THOMAS, THARAKAN, S/O. LATE P.K.GEORGE THARAKAN, DO-DO- 26. P.G.JOHN THARAKAN, S/O. DO-DO- 27. GEETHAN GEORGE, AYYANATTU PURAYIL, VADAKKEVEEDU, THYKKATTUSSERI. 28. GEENA GEORGE OF DO-DO- 29. ABRAHAM GEORGE THARAKAN, OF DO-DO- 30. JOHN GEORGE THARAKAN, OF DO-DO- R1 & R2 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER, SMT.K.MEERA. R5 TO R8, R9 & R25 TO R30 BY ADV.DR.V.N.SANKARJEE, SMY.R.UDAYA JYOTHI THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R. Bannurmath, C.J. & A.K. Basheer, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A.No. 1898 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 27th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge, dismissing the writ petition filed by the beneficiaries of a land acquisition, the present appeal is filed. 2. The area around 70 cents was acquired by the Government under the Kerala Land Acquisition Act for the purpose of construction of a godown for the appellant. After passing of the award by the Land Acquisition Officer, the same was challenged in the Civil Court and the Civil Court passed an award. This award was challenged by the owner of the land and this Court, after giving detailed hearing to both the owner and the Government, enhanced the compensation. This order was passed by this Court in the year 2002. After a lapse of almost six years, now the beneficiaries approached this Court in the present impugned writ appeal, inter alia, contending that the beneficiary is made to pay huge sum WA No.1898 of 2009 -:2:- towards interest and statutory add on like solatium and since the appellant was not given any opportunity to participate in the proceedings, the impugned award is liable to be set aside and he be given an opportunity to contest the case. 3. Considering the case at length noting the fact it is the Government which has contested the case and lost and as such beneficiaries also aware of the proceedings and challenge to the same after a lapse of six years closes his doors for any grievance. On reconsideration of the entire materials once again, we do not find any illegality or irregularity in the impugned judgment passed by the learned Single Judge as narrated above. Though the award proceedings concluded as long back as in the year 2002, the beneficiary who had the benefit of acquisition had slept over it and now after six years he has approached this Court to reopen the totally concluded procedure. As noted by the learned Single Judge, in Ext.P2 communication from the Assistant Collector to the appellant indicates that an appeal has been filed challenging the award passed by the reference court and that is the subject matter before this Court. In view of this WA No.1898 of 2009 -:3:- communication it deems fit that though the appellant was aware of the proceedings, they have slept over for six years and only on this ground of delay and laches the learned Single Judge justifiably refused to interfere with the order. Hence we do not find any merit in the appeal and the appeal will stand dismissed. S.R. Bannurmath, Chief Justice. A.K. Basheer, Judge. ttb