IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
RP.No. 646 of 2009()
1. JUSTINE SREEDHARAN
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :03/07/2009
O R D E R
R. BASANT &
M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JJ.
-------------------------------------------------
C.M.Appl. No.942 of 2009 &
R.P.No.646 of 2009 in
L.A.A.Nos.1276 & 1373 of 2000
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2009
ORDER
Sasidharan Nambiar,J.
This review petition is filed to review the common
judgment in L.A.A.Nos.1276 & 1373 of 2000 dated 23/2/2005.
There is a delay of 1064 days in filing the review petition. It is
sought to be condoned on the ground that the petitioner is laid
up due to rheumatic arthritis. A certificate to that effect from
a Medical Officer (Rtd.) is produced whereunder the petitioner
is advised to take complete rest for a period from 2/4/2005 to
28/2/2008. The judgment is sought to be reviewed for the
reason that in respect of the neighbouring properties acquired
under the same Notification, an award was passed which was
challenged before this Court in L.A.A.No.168/2003 and other
R.P.No.646 of 2009 -: 2 :-
connected appeals and this Court has remanded the L.A.R. cases
for fresh disposal and therefore the judgment is to be reviewed.
2. While dismissing the appeals, this Court has taken note
of the judgment in L.A.A.No.950/2002 which was filed
challenging the award passed in L.A.R.No.54/1998 by the same
court, which was in respect of the similar properties acquired
under the very same Notification and also from the same village.
It was found that in that case Land Acquisition Officer had
awarded a land value at the rate of Rs.3,427/- per cent and the
land acquisition court enhanced it to Rs.12,000/-. In
L.A.A.No.950/2002 that enhanced compensation was upheld. It
is taking note of this, judgment in L.A.A.Nos. 1276 & 1373 of
2000 filed by the Government, challenging the enhancement
granted by the land acquisition court, the appeal filed by the
petitioner challenging the insufficiency of the compensation
awarded was dismissed. If petitioner is aggrieved by the said
decision, his remedy is to challenge the judgment before the
Supreme Court and not prefer a review petition. Scope of a
review is converted to that of an appeal.
R.P.No.646 of 2009 -: 3 :-
3. As there is no merit in the review petition itself, we find
no necessity to condone the inordinate delay. Both the petitions
are dismissed.
Sd/-
R. BASANT
(Judge)
Sd/-
M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
(Judge)
Nan/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge
R.P.No.646 of 2009 -: 4 :-