IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
LA.App..No. 37 of 2002()
1. SANTHA MOOKKAN,
... Petitioner
2. PAUL MOOKKAN.
3. ANITHA MOOKKAN,
Vs
1. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.P.K.RAMKUMAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :09/06/2009
O R D E R
PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
L.A.A.No.37 OF 2002
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 9th day of June, 2009
JUDGMENT
Pius.C.Kuriakose, J.
We have heard Sri.P.K.Ramkumar, learned counsel for the
appellant and Sri.Basant Balaji, learned senior Government Pleader.
Sri.Ramkumar submitted that the court below did not place reliance on
Exts.A1 and A2. Ext.A2 is a court judgment and Ext.A1 is a sale deed.
On going through the impugned judgment, we find that the learned
Subordinate Judge was justified in not placing reliance on Exts.A1 and
A2. As regards Ext.A2 the same was judgment in L.A.R.No.550/1997.
It was conceded by Sri.Ramkumar himself that there was appeal by the
government against Ext.A2 and this court considering the appeal set
aside Ext.A2 and remanded that LAR to the reference court.
Sri.Ramkumar submitted that he is not aware as to the nature of the
revised judgment passed by the reference court pursuant to that remand
order.
2. Whatever that be, the evidence presently available in this
case falls short of holding that the appellant is entitled to more than
LAA.No.37/02 2
what is granted to him under the impugned judgment. Sri.Ramkumar
submitted that if opportunity is given, the appellant will be able to
produce relevant evidence which will substantiate his claim for
enhancement over what is granted.
We are inclined to grant opportunity to the appellant to produce
further evidence. But only on condition that for the period during
which this appeal was pending before this court i.e. from 7/12/2001 till
date, the appellant will not be entitled for statutory interest otherwise
admissible under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act on the
enhanced compensation to which be may become eligible by virtue of
the revised judgment to be passed by the reference court pursuant to
this order of remand. The impugned judgment and decree are set aside
subject to the above and the LAR is remanded to the Subordinate
Judge’s Court, Kozhikode.
Refund the full court fee paid on the appeal memo to the counsel
for the appellant.
PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE
P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE
sv.
LAA.No.37/02 2