IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 29TH AUGUST 2011 / 7TH BHADRA 1933 OP(C).No. 2765 of 2011(O) -------------------------------- EA 96/2011 IN EP 140/2003 IN LAR.50/1996 of SUB COURT, SULTHAN BATHERY .................... PETITIONER: ---------------- M/S. ELSTONE TEA ESTATES LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, T.B. KUNHIMAHIN HAJI, AGED 66 YEARS, S/O. MOIDEEN KUNHI, RESIDING AT MD'S BUNGLOW, ELSTONE TEA ESTATE, KALPETTA. BY ADVS. SRI.PIUS C.MUNDADAN SMT.ANJU DIVAKAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE ASSISTANT COLLECTOR AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MANANTHAWADY - 670 645. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WAYANAD DISTRICT AT KALPETTA - 673 121. 3. TREASURY OFFICER, DISTRICT TREASURY, WAYANAD AT KALPETTA - 673 121. BY ADDL. ADV. GENERAL SRI.P.C.IYPE THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs O.P.(C). NO. 2765/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE DECREE DATED 13/12/2002 IN LAR.50/1996 OF THE SUB COURT, SULTHAN BATHERY. P2: COPY OF THE E.P. NO.140/2003 ALONG WITH THE ATTACHMENT SCHEDULE. P3: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 31/05/2010 IN LAA. NO.406/2003. P4: COPY OF THE DECREE DATED 31/05/2010 IN LAA. NO.406/2003. P5: COPY OF THE AMENDMENT APPLICATION E.A. NO.7/2011 IN E.P. NO.140/2003 IN LAR. NO.50/1996. P6: COPY OF THE BALANCE STATEMENT DATED 10/01/2011 FILED BY THE DECREE HOLDER IN EP NO.140/2003 IN LAR NO.50/1996. P7: COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT STATE IN THE E.A. NO.7/2011 IN EP. NO.140/2003 ON 26/03/2011. P8: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30/03/2011 DISMISSING THE AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO.7/2011 IN EP. NO.140/2003 IN LAR.50.1996. P9: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DATED 25/04/2011 IN SLP(CIVIL)NO.2821/2011. P10: JUDGMENT DATED 08/07/2011 IN OP(C) NO.2172/2011 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P11: COPY OF THE EA. NO.96/2011 DATED 21/07/2011 IN EP. NO.140/03 IN LAR NO.50/1996 UNDER ORDER 21 RULE 52 AND SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE ALONG WITH SEPARATE ATTACHMENT SCHEDULE. P12: COPY OF THE INFORMATION ISSUED BY THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE,DISTRICT TREASURY,WAYANAD DTD.18/08/11 P12(a):COPY OF THE INFORMATION ISSUED BY THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE, DISTRICT TREASURY, WAYANAD DATED 18/08/2011. P13: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 08/12/2010 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC.NO.31289/2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- O.P(C).No.2765 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 29th day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT This original petition is filed by the decree holder in E.P.No.140 of 2003 in L.A.R.No.50 of 1996 of the Court of learned Sub Judge, Sulthan Bathery. Property belonging to the petitioner was acquired about 17 years back and an award was passed on 15.07.1996. Property was taken possession on 18.07.1996. There was a reference to the court of learned Sub Judge which answered the reference in favour of petitioner. There was an appeal arising therefrom and the appellate court enhanced compensation payable to the petitioner. Since there was refusal on the part of the executing court to amend the pending execution petition in tune with the modified decree, petitioner approached this Court with O.P(C).No.2172 of 2011. This Court disposed of the petition by Ext.P10, judgment allowing the application for amendment of the execution petition. I am told that accordingly the execution petition was amended to make it in tune with the modified decree of the appellate court. Grievance of petitioner is that though, acquisition was about 17 years back, in spite of several steps taken by the petitioner, the amount has O.P(C).No.2765 of 2011 -: 2 :- not so far been paid and that has put the petitioner to much difficulties. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that in the circumstance there may be a direction to the first respondent to deposit the amount due to the petitioner as per Ext.P4, modified decree. 2. Notice on behalf of respondents was given to the learned Government Pleader. Learned Additional Advocate General, Sri.P.C.Iype has appeared for the respondents and has submitted on behalf of the first respondent that the entire amount due will be paid to the petitioner within three months from this day. 3. Since the learned Additional Advocate General has made a submission as above, it is only appropriate that the proceeding in execution remains in abeyance for a period of three months from this day. In the circumstance, this original petition is disposed of as follows: (i) In view of the submission made by the learned Additional Advocate General that the amount due as per the modified decree will be paid to the petitioner within three months from this day, it is directed that the first respondent shall pay the entire amount due as per the modified decree to the petitioner within the said period. O.P(C).No.2765 of 2011 -: 3 :- (ii) The further proceeding in E.P.No.140 of 2003 in L.A.R.No.50 of 1996 of the Court of learned Sub Judge, Sulthan Bathery will stand in abeyance for the said period of three months from this day. (iii) The District Collector, Waynad, at Kalpetta shall take necessary steps to deposit the amount and in view of the submission made by learned Additional Advocate General. Petitioner shall give a copy of this judgment to the District Collector, Wayanad, at Kalpetta for compliance. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-