IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.PADMANABHAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 27TH MARCH 2008 / 7TH CHAITHRA 1930 FAO.No. 161 of 2007() ------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 05/10/2003 IN IA.1459/03 IN LAR.221/1997 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELANT - PETITIONER - CLAIMANT -------------------------------------------------- J.CHANDRIKA, RESIDING AT CHANDRIKA BHAVAN PONNARA NAGAR, VALLAKKADAVU.P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY ADV. SRI.BOBBY JOHN SRI.P.N.DAMODARAN NAMBOODIRI RESPONDENTS: COUNTER PETITIONER/RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI BASANT BALAJI THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. PADMANABHAN NAIR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = F.A.O. NO.161 OF 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 27th day of March, 2008 J U D G M E N T -------------------- Petitioner in I.A. No.1459 of 2003 in L.A.R. No.221 of 1997 on the file of the Additional Sub Judge, Thiruvananthapuram, is the appellant. Property belonging to the petitioner was acquired for a public purpose. Petitioner claimed enhancement of compensation by filing a petition under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The matter was referred and the same was numbered as L.A.R. No.221 of 1997. It came up for trial on 3.10.2001. On that day appellant and counsel were absent. Learned Sub Jude closed the reference. Thereafter in the year 2003 petitioner filed a petition for restoring the LAR. She did not even file a separate petition to condone delay. Learned Sub Judge dismissed that petition also on 15.10.2003. This appeal was filed on 11.6.2007 challenging the said order with a petition to condone delay of 1218 days in filling the appeal. Delay was condoned and the appeal was posted for admission. F.A.O. NO.161 OF 2007 -: 2 :- 2. Though no separate petition to condone delay was filed, the court below ought to have considered whether the appellant had offered sufficient cause for condoning the delay. After hearing both sides, I am of the view that it is only just and proper that the appellant be given one more opportunity to contest the case on merits. But the State cannot be penalised for the negligence on the part of the appellant from 3.10.2001 till today. The LAR was dismissed in 2001 and restoration application was filed on 3.3.2003 and this appeal was filed on 11.6.2007 with a petition to condone the delay of 1218 days. So even if the court below finds that the appellant is entitled to get any enhancement of compensation, she is not entitled to get interest on the said amount for the period from 3.10.2001 to 27.3.2008. But she will be entitled to get interest till 3.10.2001 and from 28.3.2008 onwards till the date of deposit. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The order passed by the learned Sub Judge in I.A. No.1459 of 2003 on 3.10.2001 is hereby set aside and that application is allowed. L.A.R. No.221 of 1997 is restored to file. The learned Sub Judge is F.A.O. NO.161 OF 2007 -: 3 :- directed to consider and dispose of the same afresh in accordance with law, subject to the condition that in case ultimately the appellant is found entitled to get enhancement of compensation she will not be entitled to get interest from 3.10.2001 till today. But she will be entitled to get interest prior to 3.10.2001 and from 28.3.2008 till the date of deposit. K. PADMANABHAN NAIR, JUDGE. vsv K. PADMANABHAN NAIR, J. ===================== M.F.A. ===================== J U D G M E N T ------------------------------------------- TH MARCH, 2008