IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2008 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 35672 of 2008(V) -------------------------------------------- IA.3175/2008 IN LAR.3/2004 of I ADDL.SUB COURT, TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER: SAFEENA, D/O.BEEMAKANNU, AGED 38 YEARS, T.C. NO.4/2239, KAIRALI NAGAR, KURAVANKONAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.D.ASOKAN RESPONDENTS: 1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. BEEMAKANNU, D/O.PATHUMMAL KUNJU, T.C.20/2127, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. NAZEEMA, D/O.BEEMAKANNU, T.C.20/2127, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.P. Balachandran, J. -------------------------- W.P.(C)No.35672 of 2008 V -------------------------- JUDGMENT Petitioner challenges in this writ petition Exhibit P5 order passed by the Sub Judge, Thiruvananthapuram in L.A.R.No.3/04 refusing to implead him as a party therein on his application filed as I.A.No.3175/08 under Order I Rule 10(2) and under Section 151 of the CPC. Respondents 2 and 3 are the claimants in the LAR and in I.A. No.3175/08 and are respectively the mother and sister of the petitioner. Petitioner seeks to get himself impleaded in L.A.R.No.3/04, a reference made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act on application filed by respondents 2 and 3 claiming enhancement in the award amount for the properties acquired from their possession. According to the petitioner, a portion of the properties so acquired belongs to him. 2. The Forum to advance claim for a portion of the acquired land is not before the reference WPC 35672/08 2 court, wherein what is required to be considered is only the claim for enhancement advanced by respondents 2 and 3. It was in the circumstances that the court below refused to implead the petitioner, who was a stranger to the proceedings. It is worthy to note that he was not even a party in the land acquisition case before the Land Acquisition Officer. There is no merit in this writ petition seeking to get the petitioner impleaded as a party in the reference proceedings in reversal of Exhibit P5 order. This writ petition, in the circumstances, is dismissed. 3rd December, 2008 (K.P.Balachandran, Judge) tkv