Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

10. Sri.V.Ajaykumar, the learned counsel appearing for the claimants would further point out that the acceptance of document No.925/2008 was no doubt questioned by the requisitioning authority earlier and the said challenge was accepted by this Court and the reference was remanded back to Sub Court, Attingal for a fresh consideration. On fresh consideration once the reference court accepted the evidence, namely sale deed No.925/2008, on appeal, the requisitioning authority and the State cannot question the findings in the absence of any evidence before the reference court.

2025:KER:11221 L.A.App. 558/2022 & conn APPELLANT'S ANNEXURES Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE VAKALATH FILED BY K.G.GIRISH BABU, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ELECTRONICS TECHONOLOGY PARKS IN NO. 128/2012 BEFORE THE SUB COURT, ATTINGAL THROUGH ADVOCATE LAR SRI.A.AMANULLA.

Annexure 2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE DOCUMENT WITH NO.1371/2007 OF SRO, MURUKKUMPUZHA DATED 12.7.2007 .