Kerala High Court
Donnie Joseph.M.Philip vs State Of Kerala on 4 October, 2006
Author: S. Siri Jagan
Bench: S.Siri Jagan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN
TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2012/22ND JYAISHTA 1934
WP(C).No. 8705 of 2007 (J)
------------------------------------
LAR.108/1999 of ADDITIONAL SUB COURT II, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONER(S):
---------------------
1. DONNIE JOSEPH.M.PHILIP,
NATIONAL BUNGLOW, PANAVILA JUNCTION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED THROUGH THE
POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SHEBA PHILIP
RESIDING AT DO. DO.
2. DERRY PHILIP.M.JOSEPH,
NATIONAL BUNGLOW, PANAVILA JUNCTION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.RAM MOHAN.G.
SRI.G.P.SHINOD
SRI.MANU V.
RESPONDENT(S):
------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. SARAMMA JOHN, D/O AMMUKUTTY JOSEPH,
KUZHIYIDATHIL, KUMBANADU P.O.
3. MOLLY PHILIP, 6118 N, CHICAGO,
ILLINOIS 60659, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
4. AMMUKUTTY JOSEPH,
NATIONAL BUNGLOW, PANAVILA JUNCTION
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
MJL
WPC.NO:8705/2007
5. SOBHA JOSE, D/O AMMUKUTTY JOSEPH,
PUTHENKULAM, KEEZHUKKUNNU, KOTTAYAM-2.
R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.V.VIJULAL
R2,R4 & R5 BY ADV. SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF
BY ADV. SRI.K.PAUL KURIAKOSE
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12-06-2012,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
MJL
WPC.NO:8705/2007
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
EXT.P1 : THE TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 4.10.2006
EXT.P2 : THE TRUE COPY OF THE WILL DEED NO.33/1988 PROBATED IN O.S.6 OF
1994
EXT.P3 : THE COPY OF WRITTEN STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY MR.M.P.PHILIP IN
LAR 58 OF 1999
EXT.P4 : THE TRUE COPY OF I.A.3800/2002 IN L.A.R.58 OF 1999
EXT.P5 : THE TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY CLAIMANTS 2
AND 3 IN L.A.R.58 OF 1999.
EXT.P6 : THE TRUE COPY OF IMPLELADING PETITION I.A.1628 OF 2004 IN L.A.R
58/99
EXT.P7 : THE TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION FILED BY FIRST CLAIMANT TO I.A.1628
OF 2004
EXT.P8 : THE TRUE COPY OF IMPLEADING PETITION, I.A.1627 OF 2004 IN L A R 58
OF 1999
EXT.P9 : TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION FILED BY FIRST CLAIMANT TO I.A.1627 OF
2004
EXT.P10 : THE TRUE COPY OF IMPLEADING PETITION I.A.5736 OF 2004 IN L.A.R 58
OF 1999.
EXT.P11 : THE TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION FILED BY FIRST CLAIMANT TO I.A.5736
OF 2004.
EXT.P12 : THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 12.10.2006 IN
I.A.NO.5736 OF 2004, I.A.1627 OF 2004 AND I.A.1628 OF 2004 IN LAR 58 OF
1999 AND I.A.1625 OF 2004 AND I.A.1626 OF 2004 IN LAR 108 OF 1999.
EXT.P13 : A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER OF REFERENCE DATED 27.01.1999
SUBMITTED BY THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER TO THE
REFERENCE COURT.
MJL
WPC.NO:8705/2007
EXT.P14 : A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE FORM OF REFERENCE UNDER SECTION
31(2) OF LAND ACQUISION ACT, 1894 SUBMITTED BY THE SPECIAL
TAHSILDAR, LAND ACQUISITION, PWD (SC), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TO
THE REFERENCE COURT
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P A TO JUDGE
MJL
S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
-------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.8705 of 2007
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 12th day of June, 2012
JUDGMENT
The petitioners are claimants 2 and 3 in L.A.R.Nos.58 and 108 of 1999 pending before the Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The same is in respect of a claim for enhanced compensation and apportionment of compensation in respect of certain properties assigned. According to the petitioners, they are entitled to the enhanced compensation absolutely and no other person is entitled to claim any part of that compensation. Respondents 2 to 5, who are paternal aunts and grandmother of the petitioners were impleaded as additional claimants by Ext.P12 order. That is under challenge in this writ petition. According to the petitioners, respondents 2 to 5 are claiming share in the enhanced compensation by virtue of Ext.P2 Will. The contention is that Ext.P2 Will does not confer any right on respondents 2 to 5 on the property in question or to claim part of the compensation in respect of the same since they are only entitled to receive some W.P.(C)No.8705/07 2 amounts fixed therein as payable to them the liability to pay which is on the father of the petitioners. The petitioners, therefore, seek the following reliefs:
"(i) to quash Exhibit P12 order.
(ii) to dismiss I.A. 5736 of 2004, I.A. 1627 of 2004, and 1628 of 2004 in L A R 58 of 1999 and I.A. 1626 of 2004 and 1625 of 2004 in L.A.R.108 of 1999 all filed by the respondents 2 to 5 herein for impleading themselves in the above Land Acquisition reference cases."
2. I have heard both parties. I am of opinion that this is an unnecessary litigation. Even if the respondents 2 to 5 are impleaded as parties to the Land Acquisition References, they do not automatically become entitled to share in the compensation. It is for the Land Acquisition References Court to decide the question as to who all are entitled to compensation for the property acquired by the Government, if there is any dispute regarding the same. As such, the petitioners can very well raise all their contentions in the Land Acquisition References before the Reference Court itself, which the Reference Court is bound to consider in accordance with W.P.(C)No.8705/07 3 law. In fact the petitioners themselves have done a disservice to themselves by getting the LARs stayed by this Court for five long years. Therefore, I am not inclined to exercise my discretionary jurisdiction in favour of the petitioners and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed leaving open to the parties to raise their contentions before the Land Acquisition Court in the references.
S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.8705/07 4 W.P.(C)No.8705/07 5