✦ Kerala High Court · 30 Jan 2010

G.R.PRADEEP KUMAR v. SANTHI @SANTHAKUMARI AMMA

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 22. G.R.GOPALAKRISHNAN @ RAJAN, S/O.SANTHAKUMARI AMMA, SANKARANARAYANATHIL HOUSE, GURUVAYOOR VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR-680 506. BY THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-07-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P.(C).NO.2449/2012-O: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT-P1. THE TRUE COPY OF THE IA.NO.302/2010 FILED…

Judgment

BY ADVS.SRI.P.R.SREEJITH, SRI.M.PROMODH KUMAR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------

#1. SANTHI @SANTHAKUMARI AMMA, SANKARANARAYANATHIL HOUSE, GURUVAYOOR VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR-680 506.

#2. G.R.GOPALAKRISHNAN @ RAJAN, S/O.SANTHAKUMARI AMMA, SANKARANARAYANATHIL HOUSE, GURUVAYOOR VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR-680 506. BY THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-07-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P.(C).NO.2449/2012-O: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT-P1. THE TRUE COPY OF THE IA.NO.302/2010 FILED IN LAR NO.20/2009 OF THE 2ND ADDL.SUB JUDGE, THRISSUR. EXHIBIT-P2. THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S COUNTER STATEMENT DATED 30.1.2010 IN IA.NO.302/2010. EXHIBIT-P3. THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 8.4.2010 IN IA.NO.302/2010 IN LAR NO.20/2009 OF THE 2ND ADDL.SUB JUDGE, THRISSUR. EXHIBIT-P4. THE TRUE COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION WAS FILED AS IA.1523/2011 BEFORE THE ADDL.SUB COURT-II, THRISSUR AGAINST EXT.P3 ORDER. EXHIBIT-P5. THE TRUE COPY OF IA.1532/2011 TO CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING THE REVIEW PETITION BEFORE THE ADDL.SUB COURT-III, THRISSUR. EXHIBIT-P6. THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17.6.2011 IN EXT.P5 IA.1532/2011 TO CONDONE THE DELAY. EXHIBIT-P7. THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17.6.2011 IN EXT.P4 IA NO.1523/2011 REVIEW PETITION. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. V.CHITAMBARESH,J. = = = = = = = = = = = O.P.(C) No.2449 of 2012 = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = Dated this the 30th day of July, 2012 J U D G M E N T The court below has in the order impugned clarified that the petitioner can raise all his contentions as regards the status of the respondents in the land acquisition reference pending. The reference court shall consider as to whether the petitioner or the respondents or both of them could represent the estate of the deceased claimant. The court below shall render a specific finding as to the entitlement of the parties referred to above for compensation in the land acquisition reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The order of the court below refusing to review the order impleading the respondents in the land acquisition reference is affirmed subject to the above clarifications. The Original Petition (Civil) is disposed of as above. V.CHITAMBARESH. JUDGE 2 3

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Land Acquisition Act — s. 18.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Kerala High Court, on 30 Jan 2010. The bench was V CHITAMBARESH.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.

Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Kerala High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. OP(C) No. 2449 of 2012). ← Search more judgments