IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 25TH AUGUST 2009 / 3RD BHADRA 1931 RP.No. 595 of 2009 --------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WA.628/2009 Dated 25/03/2009 .................. REVIEW PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS IN W.A. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SHIJU, S/O.SHYAMALA DEVI, 34 YEARS, CHENJERI PUTHEN VEEDU, PADINJATTINKARA, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT PUTHENMADATHIL VEEDU, PERINGAZHA KARA, H.M.T.COLONY, KALAMASSERY, KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN 683 503. 2. SHIBU, S/O.SHYAMALA DEVI, 30 YEARS, CHENJERI PUTHEN VEEDU, PADINJATTINKARA, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT PUTHENMADATHIL VEEDU, PERINGAZHA KARA, H.M.T.COLONY, KALAMASSERY, KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN 683 503. 3. SYAMALA DEVI, D/O.SARALA DEVI, AGED 60, CHENJERI PUTHEN VEEDU, PADINJATTINKARA, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT PUTHENMADATHIL VEEDU, PERINGAZHA KARA, H.M.T.COLONY, KALAMASSERY, PIN 683 503. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.KURIKESU RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN W.A. --------------------------------------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) NO.2, KOLLAM (NOW THE OFFICE IS SHIFTED TO KALLADA IRRIGATION PROJECT COMPOUND, KOTTIYAM). BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & Kurian Joseph, J. ------------------------------------------ R.P.No.595 of 2009 in W.A.No.628 of 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 25th day of August, 2009 ORDER Kurian Joseph, J. This is a review petition. The issue pertains to the simple question as to whether there was an application within three months for reference under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act. The Reference Court's order is dated 31.1.2001. Admittedly, the application was made only on 21.7.2001. The submission is that since there is a provision for excluding the time taken for certified copies, the affidavit regarding justification for the delay in submitting the application for certified copy should also be considered. Yet another submission is that in any case, since the judgment of the Reference Court was pending in appeal filed by the State before this Court as L.A.A.No.710 of 2001 which was R.P.No.595/2009 in W.A.No.628/2009 - 2 - disposed of only on 6.12.2007, the application even if filed after the judgment of the appellate court should be treated as in time. We are afraid, both the contentions cannot be considered. We have already held in our judgment placing reliance on the decision reported in State of A.P. and another v. Marri Venkaiah and others, (2003) 7 SCC 280, that there is no provision for condonation of delay in filing the application. As far as the other contention that the judgment of the reference court becomes final only by the judgment of the appellate court and thereafter only the time begins to run also cannot be appreciated in view of the Constitution Bench decision of the Supreme Court reported in Union of India v. Reghubir Singh (1989) 2 SCC 754, wherein it has been held that the expression 'any such award' as appearing under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act cannot have any reference to the appellate orders of the High Court or of the Supreme Court. Therefore, we do not find any error apparent on R.P.No.595/2009 in W.A.No.628/2009 - 3 - the face of the record, or even otherwise, requiring any correction in the review petition. The review petition lacks merits and it is dismissed. S.R.Bannurmath, Chief Justice Kurian Joseph, Judge vns