WP(C) No. 6406 of 2012 · Kerala High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- C K ABDUL REHIM, LTRUE COPYPA JUDGERKM C K ABDUL REHIM
Outcome
Disposed of
Therefore the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd W.P.C.No.6406/20123respondent to take effective steps to refer the matter to DistrictCourt, Thrissur and to make deposit of the compensation amount before that court, at the earliest. Needful steps in this regardshall be taken without…
Judgment
C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J.………………………….....W.P.C.No.6406/2012…………………………......Dated this the 11th Day of April, 2012J U D G M E N T…………………......Petitioner is seeking direction to the 2nd respondent for disbursement of the amount of compensation awarded in LACNos.110/2007, 257/2007 and 69/2006. It is stated that the owner of the property was the predecessor in interest of the petitioner, one Sri. Vareed. It is admitted that there existed a civil suit with respect to partition of property belonging to deceased Sri. Vareed. In view of the dispute, the 2nd respondent had not disbursed the amount of compensation to the petitioner. The petitioner had approached this court on an earlier occasion in W.P.(C)No.36129/2009. In Ext.P1 judgment this court directed the 2ndrespondent to consider a representation submitted by the petitioner in this regard and to pass appropriate orders. Petitioneris complaining that the amount was not disbursed inspite of such direction. In the affidavit filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent it is revealed that, pursuant to Ext.P1 judgment, the matter was referred to Sub Court, Iringalakkuda, under Section 3H (4) of the National Highways Act, 1956, after making deposit of the amount W.P.C.No.6406/20122of compensation before that court. But subsequently it was revealed that the said court is not having jurisdiction and the appropriate court is the District Court, Thrissur. Therefore the SubCourt, Iringalakkuda had disposed of the matter observing that reference has to be made to the appropriate court. But the compensation which was deposited before that court has not been returned and the concerned files were also not returnedinspite of request made in this regard, is the statement. The 2ndrespondent had assured that necessary steps will be taken to refer the matter to District Court, Thrissur, immediately on refund of the deposit amount.
Considering the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that, it is for the 2nd respondent to take steps to get the files returned from the Sub Court and to present the same before the District Court, Thrissur. The deposit now remaining before the Sub Court, Iringalakkuda can either be transferred to the DistrictCourt, Thrissur or can be obtained refund and redeposited. However necessary steps in this regard need be taken by the 2ndrespondent without any further delay.
Operative part
Therefore the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd W.P.C.No.6406/20123respondent to take effective steps to refer the matter to DistrictCourt, Thrissur and to make deposit of the compensation amount before that court, at the earliest. Needful steps in this regardshall be taken without any further delay and such reference shall be made, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIMJUDGETRUE COPYPA TO JUDGERKM
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.