IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 13TH JANUARY 2009 / 23RD POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 37698 of 2008(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- KALLAN VIMALA, W/O.MUKUNDAN, AGED 51 YRS "MEETHALE THAYYIL",P.O.MOORIYAD. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, L.A, THALASSERY. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, K.S.I.D.C, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.JOBY CYRIAC, SC, KSIDC FOR R2 GOVT. PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 37698 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 13th January, 2009. J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the claimant in a land acquisition reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act before the Subordinate Judge, Thalasserry. By Ext. P1 judgment, the same was dismissed for default. Petitioner's application for restoration along with the petition to condone delay has been dismissed by the Sub Court as per orders endorsed in Exts.P2 and P3. The petitioner is challenging Exts.P1, P2 and P3. 2. Although, technically the order of the Subordinate Judge may be correct, I am of opinion that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Subordinate Judge should have taken a lenient view and the petitioner should have been given another opportunity to contest the matter on merits, after adducing evidence in support of her claim. Accordingly, Exts.P.1, P2 and P3 are quashed and the Subordinate Judge is directed to restore L.A.R.No. 316/2005 to file and re-adjudicate the same after affording an opportunity to the petitioner to adduce evidence. The petitioner shall pay batta, which, as per Ext. P1, has not been paid, within one week on receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.