IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2009 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1931 LA.App..No. 57 of 2009() ------------------------ LAR.329/2004 of PRL.SUB COURT,KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT(S): 4TH COMPLAINANT ----------------------------- THE SECRETARY, KURUMULLOOR WEST SREE NARAYANAVILASAM, N.S.S. KARAYOGAM NO.3268, KURUMALLOOR. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW PHILIP EDAPPALLIL SRI.K.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAI RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/CLAIMANTS ------------------------------------ 1. STATE OOF KERALA, REPRESENTED DISTRICT COLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE PRESIDENT, VEDAGIRI DEVASWOM, VEDAGIRI, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, ETTUMANOORAPPAN COLLEGE, VEDAGIRI DEVASWOM. 4. THE SECRETARY, N.S.S.KARAYOGAM NO.153, KANAKKARY. 5. K.P.NEELAKANDA PILLAI, N/O.KANAKKU KERALAM PILLAI,KOLLAMPARAMPIL HOUSE, KURUMULLOOR. ADV. SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI FOR R1 SRI.J.R.PREM NAVAZ FOR R1 ADDL.ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR R1 GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1 SMT.SMITHA GEORGE FOR R5 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ L.A.A.No. 57 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 31st day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Heard Sri.Mathew Philip, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri.K. Ramkumar, learned senior counsel for the second respondent. 2. Sri.Mathew Philip, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that only 1/4th of the total amount, which was under deposit with the reference court, is presently retained by that court and the balance 3/4th is already released to the 2nd respondent. The learned counsel submitted that the learned Sub Judge was not justified in observing that the release of balance 1/4th to the appellant will be subject to the outcome of the suit (O.S.94/2006) pending before that court. According to the learned counsel, the said observation is likely to cause prejudice to the appellant in O.S.No.94/2006, the trial of which is yet to be started. L.A.A.No.57/2008 2 3. We do not think that the apprehension of the learned counsel is well founded. By observing that the release of the amount will be subject to the result of O.S.No.94/2006 it has been actually made clear by the learned Subordinate Judge that the question regarding the appellant's entitlement to the 1/4th is to be decided by the civil court itself. We also clarify that the above observation in the impugned judgment will not cause any prejudice to the interest of the appellant or the other parties in O.S.94/2006 and that the learned Sub Judge will decide O.S.No.94/2006 on the basis of the evidence which comes on record before that court. 4. We have, while admitting this appeal, passed an interim order directing the Subordinate Judge to retain atleast 1/4th of the total amount under deposit in the CCD itself and not to release that portion to anybody until further orders. In modification of that order, there will be a direction to the Subordinate Judge to transfer that amount to a Nationalized Bank having Branch at Kottayam and keep the same as Fixed Deposit in the name of the court so that once the Subordinate L.A.A.No.57/2008 3 Judge decides O.S.No.94/2006, the successful party will get interest also. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE dpk