IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 16TH MARCH 2009 / 25TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 4768 of 2009(P) ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23 /01 /2009 IN IA 59 & 60/2009. IN LAR.46/2007 of ADDL.SUB COURT,PARAVUR .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------- 1. GEORGE VARGHESE S/O.VARGHESE, UDUPPAN HOUSE KIZHAKKAMBALAM. 2. JOSEPH VARGHESE, S/O.VARGHESE UDUPPAN HOUSE, KIZHAKKAMBALAM. 3. BABURAJ, S/O.THOMAS, THOTTATHIL, KIZHAKKAMBALAM. 4. GEORGE ANTONY, S/O.ANTONY KUREEKAL KIZHAKKAMBALAM. BY ADV. MR.C.P.WILSON MS.ROSE MICHAEL RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MS. K.R. DEEPA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.4768 OF 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioners are claimants in L.A.R.No.46/07 before the Sub Court, North Paravoor. When the L.A.R. came up for evidence, the petitioners filed two petitions, one for accepting an additional claim statement and the other for issuing a commission for ascertaining the nature of the land and the damages, which the petitioners would sustain on account of the acquisition of part of the petitioners' property. Both the petitions were dismissed by Ext.P3 order. The petitioners are challenging Ext.P3 order. Although the petitioners challenge the dismissal of both the petitions, the petitioners would now confine their prayer for acceptance of the additional claim statement. 2. This is stoutly opposed by the learned Government Pleader on the ground that the claim raised in the additional claim statement was not raised before the Land Acquisition Officer and they did not even file any claim statement before the reference court raising such a claim and it was only when the W.P.(c)No.4768/09 2 matter came up for evidence, the petitioners filed the petitions. After hearing both sides, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: The Additional Sub Court, North Paravoor shall accept the additional claim statement filed by the petitioners subject to the contention of the Government that since the petitioners had not raise the claim before the Land Acquisition Officer, the petitioners are not entitled to any reliefs in respect of that claim, which issue shall also be decided in the L.A.R. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd W.P.(c)No.4768/09 3