IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2009 / 24TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 37756 of 2008(T) -------------------------- LAR.325/2006 of ADL.SUB COURT, THALASSERY .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- C.O. JANARDHANAN, AGED 69 YEARS, S/O. CHANDU, DREYAS, NEAR KULAM BAZAR, P.O. MUZHAPPILANGAD, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN SMT.LISHA.M.G. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, WSP DIVISION, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, KANNUR. ADV. SMT.AMBIKA DEVI, SC, KWA FOR R2 G.P. SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/01/2009, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 37801 OF 2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).Nos.37756 & 37801 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 14th day of January, 2009 J U D G M E N T In both the writ petitions, the Land Acquisition References in which the petitioners were claimants, were answered in the negative on the ground that the petitioners' counsel and the petitioners were absent on the date when the matter was posted and there was no evidence adduced justifying claim for enhanced compensation. In W.P. (C).No.37756/2008 the application for restoration was also dismissed. The petitioners are challenging those orders. Although technically what the Sub Court had done in these cases may be correct strictly going by the rules of procedure, I am of opinion that these are cases where a lenient attitude should have been taken. In the above circumstances, the impugned orders are quashed and the Sub Court is directed to readjudicate the Land Acquisition References afresh, restoring them to file and after affording another opportunity to the petitioners to adduce evidence to prove their claim. The writ petitions are disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 2