Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

THE STATE OF KERALA versus SHYLA ANURUDHAN, W/O.P.ANURUDHAN

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


THE STATE OF KERALA v. SHYLA ANURUDHAN, W/O.P.ANURUDHAN - RP No. 218 of 2005(L) [2007] RD-KL 17086 (10 September 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

RP No. 218 of 2005(L)

1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
... Petitioner

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE,

3. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR(LA),

Vs

1. SHYLA ANURUDHAN, W/O.P.ANURUDHAN,
... Respondent

2. PUSHPALATHA, W/O.VIJAYAN,

3. VIJAYAN G., CHARUVILA VEEDU,

4. JAGADAMMA, SOBHA NIVAS

5. RADHAMMA V.K., RADHA SADANAM,

6. T.P.HARI, SUNIL BHAVANAM,

7. THANKAMMA, SANTHIBHAVAN, PULIMATHU POST,

8. SARASWATHY M., USHAS, PULIMATHU POST,

9. VIJAYAN G., USHAS, PULIMATHU POST,

10. PADMA P.T., ASWATHY, PULIMATHU POST,

11. AMMUKUTTI AMMA, CHALUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU,

12. ABDUL AZEEZ, PULIMATHU POST,

13. NAZEEMA BEEVI, NAZEEMA VILAS,

14. KUNJAN BHASKARAN, GEETHA BHAVANAM,

15. S.NOUSHAD, P.V.HOUSE, PULIMATHU POST,

16. ISHA BEEVI, S.P.V. HOUSE,

17. C.KRISHNAMMA, PULIMATHU POST,

18. N.J.RAJAALAKSHMY, RASHMI, PULIMATHU POST

19. TAJUDEEN, S.P.V.HOUSE, PULIMATHU POST,

20. SANDEENA BEEVI, P.V.HOUSE,

21. ANIRUDHAN,

For Petitioner :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

For Respondent :SRI.C.RAJENDRAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

Dated :10/09/2007

O R D E R

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.

R.P. NO.218/2005 IN W.P.(C) NO. 17122/2004

Dated this the 10th day of September , 2007

O R D E R

Heard both sides. The Government Pleader submits that Annexure I notice of award under Section 12 (2) of the Land Acquisition Act had actually been served on the petitioner much prior to the judgment of this court and, therefore, this court is not justified in directing the awarding officer to issue a fresh notice under Section 12 (2) of the Act.

2. Sri.C.Rajendran, the learned counsel for the respondent(writ petitioner) submits that the only notice which was received by the writ petitioner was Ext.P4, which is a notice under Rule 15 (3) regarding taking possession of the property. The question whether Annexure I notice issued to the writ petitioner has thus become contentious. I allow the Review Petition and recall my judgment. The 3rd respondent will file counter affidavit in the writ petition within three weeks from today. Post the writ petition before the appropriate court. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,

JUDGE.

Dpk


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.