Thayil Pankajavally v. Moolamvelly Keezhalath Unnikrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/27TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 OP(C).No. 3117 of 2015 (O) --------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN LAR 353/2000 of SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE PETITIONER:
-------------------------- THAYIL PANKAJAVALLY, AGED 59 YEARS EADAKKAT AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK.
BY ADVS.SRI.V.V.ASOKAN (SR.) SRI.K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER SRI.P.RAHUL RESPONDENTS:
----------------------------
1. MOOLAMVELLY KEEZHALATH UNNIKRISHNAN EDAKKAT AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE- 673 001.
2. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) KOZHIKODE - 673 001.
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(C).No. 3117 of 2015 (O) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- P1: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OS 41/1998 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT, KOZHIKODE DATED 24/6/2010.
P2: TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL IN AS.NO.95/2010 BEFORE THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, KOZHIKODE DATED 15/7/2010. P3: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN I.A NO.4630/2015 IN LAR 353/2000 DATED 30/11/2015 P4: TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT HEREIN IN I.A NO.4630/2015 IN LAR 353/2000 DATED 1/12/2015 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
NIL --------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE.
cms
K.ABRAHAM MATHEW J.
-------------------------------------------------------- O.P.(C)No.3117 of 2015 -------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of December, 2015
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is one of the claimants in LAR No.353 of 2000. There is a dispute with regard to the entitlement of the compensation. Meanwhile one of the parties had filed O.S.No.41 of 1998. The matter is now pending before the appellate court as A.S.No.95 of 2010. The petitioner prayed for stay the proceedings in the land acquisition matter. But that has been rejected by the learned Sub Judge. It is alleged that a certified copy of the order has not been issued. The only prayer is to direct the learned Sub Judge to issue certified copy.
2. Heard.
The trial court is directed to issue a copy of the order to the petitioner in accordance with law. With the above observation this Original petition is closed. The reference court shall not proceed with the enquiry into the land acquisition proceedings until seven days from the date of issuance of certified copy. Sd/- K.ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE cms /True copy/ P.S.to Judge