High Court of KeralaDivision BenchThe court disposed the batch by partly allowing...
LAA Nos. 528/2014 and connected cases (Guruvayur Devaswom v. P.K. Jayarajan, P.K. Raveendran, M. Mohan Kumar and others)
Case / Petition Number:LA.APP. NO. 528/2014
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court of Kerala
- Hon'ble Judges
- P.B. SURESH KUMAR
- C.S. SUDHA
- Judgment Date
- 2022-11-15
- Court Decision / Holding
- The court held that Guruvayur Devaswom’s petitions under Article 227 were not maintainable given the available appellate remedy; on merits, LA654/2014 and other connected appeals were partly allowed and all other appeals were allowed, fixing compensation at ₹9,00,000 per cent for the acquired land; Original Petitions were dismissed; interlocutory applications were closed; each LAR award was modified accordingly.
- Final Disposition
- The court disposed the batch by partly allowing LA654/2014 and allowing the other appeals; compensation for acquired land fixed at ₹9,00,000 per cent; Original Petitions (C) dismissed; Guruvayur Devaswom’s Article 227 petitions not maintainable; interlocutory orders closed; cases to be modified accordingly; neutral citation: null.
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- P.K.JAYARAJAN S/O LATE KUTTAPPA P
- P.K.RAVEENDRAN S/O LATE KUTTAPPA P
- M.MOHAN KUMAR S/O MANIKKATH VISALAKSHI AMMA
Respondents
- THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION) GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101
- THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101
- THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680001
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • Sri.S.RADHAKRISHNAN KUM.
- • R.ANJALI
- • Shri.AJIT G ANJARLEKAR
- • Shri.S.RAJMOHAN
- • Smt.V.M.RUSHDA
- • P.B.KRISHNAN
- • Sabu George
- • Manu Vyasnan Peter
Counsels for Respondents
- • Smt.N.SUDHADEVI, SPL.GP FOR R1 AND R3
- • SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SC FOR R2
Case Synopsis & Summary
This is a consolidated judgment of the Kerala High Court in Land Acquisition Appeals arising from awards under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for land acquired for Guruvayur Devaswom’s English medium school at Guruvayoor. The batch includes LAAs 528/2014 and several connected appeals, challenging the Land Acquisition Reference Court’s (LAR) awards, and related OPs under Article 227 filed by Guruvayur Devaswom. The court addresses two core issues: maintainability of the high court writ petitions under Article 227 where statutory remedy by appeal exists, and the appropriate quantum of compensation for the acquired lands. On maintainability, the court holds that petitions under Article 227 are not maintainable where an appeal lies under the Land Acquisition Act, and that Guruvayur Devaswom should have availed appellate remedies, not writs. On merits, the court scrutinizes the LAR Court’s method of determining market value, including reliance on Ext. B2 (1998) and Exts. A2–A4, and the time-gap to dispossession (2010). It ultimately fixes compensation at ₹9,00,000 per cent for lands similarly situated to nearby plots, following adjustments and equal treatment of adjacent lands. The judgment partly allows LAAs (notably LA A 654/2014) and allows others, while dismissing the Original Petitions as not maintainable. Interlocutory proceedings are closed.
Provisions of Law Cited
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 54Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 4(1)Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 18Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 19Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 115Order XLIV thereofConstitution of India Article 227
Legal Doctrines & Maxims
- Certiorari does not lie to quash judgments of inferior courts of civil jurisdiction (C. Basappa v. T. Nagappa, AIR 1954 SC 440)
- Finality and binding character of judgments of competent courts (Gorie Gouri Naidu v. Thandrothu Bodemma, 1997 (2) SCC 552; Reddy Veerana v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 2022 SC 2225; State of West Bengal v. Hemant Kumar, AIR 1966 SC 1061)
- Right of appeal is statutory and grounds cannot be enlarged by Article 227 (Sadhana Lodh v. National Insurance Company Ltd., 2003 (3) SCC 524)
- Radhey Shyam v. Shabi Nath; three-judge bench overruled Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai (overruled doctrine)
- Virudhunagar Hindu Nadargal Dharma Paribalana Sabai v. Tuticorin Educational Society, 2019 (9) SCC 538
- Muhamed Ali v. V. Jaya, MANU/SC/0863/2022 (availability of statutory appeal relieves writ jurisdiction)
- Sarup Singh v. Union of India, 2011 SCC 198 (decree by competent court is binding)
- Synthesis of binding precedents: Krishnadevi Malchand Kamathia; M. Meenakshi; Custodian Vested Forest Palakkad v. P.V. Kunhiraman (cited to illustrate binding judgments)
- State of West Bengal v. Hemant Kumar; Krishnadevi Malchand Kamathia; M. Meenakshi; Custodian Vested Forest Palakkad v. P.V. Kunhiraman (cited as supportive of finality and binding nature)
- Gorie Gouri Naidu v. Thandrothu Bodemma (binding effect of interparty judgments)
- Reddy Veerana v. State of Uttar Pradesh (finality of binding judicial decisions)
- Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai (overruled by Radhey Shyam)
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The appellants contended that compensation should be determined on market value of land as on the date of dispossession or Section 4(1) notification, supported by nearby comparables Ext.A2–A4; Ext.B2 (1998) is distant in time and not comparable; the LAR Court’s method of increasing annual value by 15% was unwarranted; they request ₹9,00,000 per cent or higher for lands similarly situated.
Contentions of Respondents
The respondents argued that the LAR Court rightly relied on Ext.B2 and fixed ₹1,20,000 per cent; Ext.A2–A4 were not sufficiently similar; the market value must be as on the Section 4(1) date, and dispossession adjustments should be reflected; maintainability of Article 227 petitions was not warranted since statutory remedies exist; writs ought to be dismissed.
Cited Precedents (14)
| Case Name | Citation | Treatment | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| C. Basappa v. T. Nagappa | AIR 1954 SC 440 | Positive | Used to illustrate that certiorari cannot quash judgments of inferior civil courts. |
| K.C.T.Steel Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Kerala | 2016(4) KHC 336 | Positive | Cited for supervisory jurisdiction limits. |
| Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar v. State of Maharashtra | AIR 1967 SC 1 | Positive | Certiorari limitations; binding nature of judgments. |
| Sadhana Lodh v. National Insurance Company Ltd. | 2003(3) SCC 524 | Mentioned Only | Used to discuss the statutory right of appeal against writs under Article 227. |
| Radhey Shyam v. Shabi Nath | AIR 2015 SC 3269 | Overruled | Radhey Shyam overruled Surya Dev Rai; used to justify overrule of prior proposition. |
| Virudhunagar Hindu Nadargal Dharma Paribalana Sabai v. Tuticorin Educational Society | 2019(9) SCC 538 | Positive | Availability of appellate remedy dissuades High Court writ jurisdiction. |
| Muhamed Ali v. V. Jaya | MANU/SC/0863/2022 | Positive | If statutory remedy by appeal exists, High Court should not entertain Article 227 writs. |
| Sarup Singh v. Union of India | (2011) SCC 198 | Positive | Binding effect of decrees by courts with jurisdiction; nullity when without jurisdiction but binding until set aside. |
| Gorie Gouri Naidu v. Thandrothu Bodemma | (1997) 2 SCC 552 | Positive | Interparty judgments bind the parties. |
| Reddy Veerana v. State of Uttar Pradesh | AIR 2022 SC 2225 | Positive | Finality and binding nature of judicial decisions. |
| State of West Bengal v. Hemant Kumar | AIR 1966 SC 1061 | Positive | Binding character of judgments from competent courts. |
| Krishnadevi Malchand Kamathia v. Bombay Environmental Action Group | AIR 2011 SC 1140 | Mentioned Only | Cited in context of binding judgments. |
| M. Meenakshi v. Metadin Agarwal | (2006)7 SCC 470 | Mentioned Only | Cited as supportive of finality/binding judgments. |
| Custodian Vested Forest Palakkad v. P.V.Kunhiraman | 2018(3) KHC 768 | Mentioned Only | Cited regarding binding judgments principles. |
Diagnostic Tool
Does this judgment govern your specific facts?
Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against LAA Nos. 528/2014 and connected cases (Guruvayur Devaswom v. P.K. Jayarajan, P.K. Raveendran, M. Mohan Kumar and others) and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.
Extracted Judgment Text
Exact text extracted from official judgment records.
# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
**PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
## **&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA**
**TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA, 1944**
**LA.APP. NO. 528 OF 2014**
**AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.01.2014 IN LAR.NO.27/2010**
**OF THE 2ND ADDITIONAL SUB JUDGE, THRISSUR.**
## **APPELLANT/CLAIMANT:**
**P.K.JAYARAJAN S/O. LATE KUTTAPPA.P., PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, 24/375, POONKUNNAM POST, THRISSUR-680002. BY ADVS.SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN KUM.R.ANJALI SHRI.AJIT G ANJARLEKAR SHRI.S.RAJMOHAN SMT.V.M.RUSHDA**
## **RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:**
**1 THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION) GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101. 2 THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101. 3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680001. BY ADVS.SMT.N.SUDHADEVI, SPL.GP FOR R1 AND R3 SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SC FOR R2**
**THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..529/2014, 530/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**2**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA, 1944**
**LA.APP. NO. 529 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.01.2014 IN LAR 30/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **APPELLANT/CLAIMANT:**
**P.K. JAYARAJAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA.P, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, 24/375, POONKUNNAM POST, THRISSUR - 680002. BY ADVS.SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN KUM.R.ANJALI SHRI.AJIT G ANJARLEKAR SHRI.S.RAJMOHAN SMT.V.M.RUSHDA RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: 1 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION), GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM,GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR - 680 101. 2 THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680 101. 3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR - 680001. BY ADVS.SMT.N.SUDHADEVI, SPL.GP FOR R1 AND R3 SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SC FOR R2**
## **RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:**
**THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**3**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA, 1944**
**LA.APP. NO. 530 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.01.2014 IN LAR 25/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **APPELLANT/CLAIMANT:**
**P.K.JAYARAJAN S/O. LATE KUTTAPPA.P., PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, 24/375, POONKUNNAM POST, THRISSUR-680002. BY ADVS.SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN KUM.R.ANJALI SHRI.AJIT G ANJARLEKAR SHRI.S.RAJMOHAN SMT.V.M.RUSHDA**
## **RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:**
**1 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION) GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101. 2 THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101. 3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR-680001.**
**BY ADVS.SMT.N.SUDHADEVI, SPL.GP FOR R1 AND R3 SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SC FOR R2**
**THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**4**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA, 1944**
**LA.APP. NO. 531 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.01.2014 IN LAR 33/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR APPELLANT/CLAIMANT: P.K.RAVEENDRAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA.P, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE,GURUVAYOOR-680101.**
## **APPELLANT/CLAIMANT:**
**BY ADVS.P.B.KRISHNAN P.B.SUBRAMANYAN SABU GEORGE MANU VYASAN PETER**
## **RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:**
**1 THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION) GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR,THRISSUR-680101. 2 THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR,THRISSUR-680101. 3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680001.**
**BY ADVS.SMT.N.SUDHADEVI, SPL.GP FOR R1 AND R3 SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SC FOR R2**
**THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**5**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
**1944**
**LA.APP. NO. 532 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.01.2014 IN LAR 26/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
**APPELLANT/CLAIMANT: P.K.JAYARAJAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA.P, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE,24/375, POONKUNNAM POST, THRISSUR-680002. BY ADVS.SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN KUM.R.ANJALI SHRI.AJIT G ANJARLEKAR SHRI.S.RAJMOHAN SMT.V.M.RUSHDA**
## **RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:**
**1 SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION) GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR,THRISSUR-680101. 2 THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR,THRISSUR-680101. 3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680 001.**
**BY ADVS.SMT.N.SUDHADEVI, SPL.GP FOR R1 AND R3 SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SC FOR R2**
**THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**6**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA, 1944**
**LA.APP. NO. 544 OF 2014**
**AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.01.2014 IN LAR 31/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **APPELLANT/CLAIMANT:**
**P.K RAVEENDRAN S/O LATE KUTTAPPA P, PUTHUSSSERY HOUSE, GURUVAYOOR-680101. BY ADVS.P.B.KRISHNAN P.B.SUBRAMANYAN SABU GEORGE MANU VYASAN PETER**
## **RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:**
- **1 THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION) GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101.**
- **2 THE ADMINISTRATOR, GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101.**
- **3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680001. BY ADVS.SMT.N.SUDHADEVI, SPL.GP FOR R1 AND R3 SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SC FOR R2**
**THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**7**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA, 1944**
**LA.APP. NO. 545 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.01.2014 IN LAR 29/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **APPELLANT/CLAIMANT:**
**P.K JAYARAJAN S/O LATE KUTTAPPA P, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, 24/375, POONKUNNAM POST, THRISSUR - 680 002. BY ADVS.SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN KUM.R.ANJALI SHRI.AJIT G ANJARLEKAR SHRI.S.RAJMOHAN SMT.V.M.RUSHDA**
## **RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:**
|**1**|**THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR(LAND ACQUISITION)**|**THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR(LAND ACQUISITION)**|
|---|---|---|
||**GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM,**||
||**GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR - 680**|**101.**|
|**2**|**THE ADMINISTRATOR**||
||**GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM,**||
||**GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR - 680**|**101.**|
|**3**|**THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR**||
||**THRISSUR - 680 001.**||
||**BY ADVS.SMT.N.SUDHADEVI, SPL.GP FOR R1 AND R3**||
||**SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SC FOR R2**||
**THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**8**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA, 1944**
**LA.APP. NO. 546 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.01.2014 IN LAR 32/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **APPELLANT/CLAIMANT:**
**P.K. RAVEENDRAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA.P, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, GURUVAYOOR 680101. BY ADVS. P.B.KRISHNAN P.B.SUBRAMANYAN SABU GEORGE MANU VYASAN PETER**
## **RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:**
**1 THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION) GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101. 2 THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR, 680101. 3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR, 680001.**
**BY ADVS.SMT.N.SUDHADEVI, SPL.GP FOR R1 AND R3 SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SC FOR R2**
**THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**9**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA, 1944**
**LA.APP. NO. 550 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.01.2014 IN LAR 35/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **APPELLANT/CLAIMANT:**
**P.K.RAVEENDRAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA.P, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, GURUVAYOOR 680101. BY ADVS.P.B.KRISHNAN P.B.SUBRAMANYAN SABU GEORGE MANU VYASAN PETER**
## **RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:**
**1 THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION) GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101. 2 THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR, 680101. 3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR, 680001.**
**BY ADVS.SMT.N.SUDHADEVI, SPL.GP FOR R1 AND R3 SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SC FOR R2**
**THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**10**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
# **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
**1944**
**LA.APP. NO. 551 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.01.2014 IN LAR 28/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **APPELLANT/CLAIMANT:**
**P.K.JAYARAJAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA P, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, 24/375, POONKUNNAM POST, THRISSUR -680002 BY ADVS.SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN KUM.R.ANJALI SHRI.AJIT G ANJARLEKAR SHRI.S.RAJMOHAN SMT.V.M.RUSHDA**
##
##
**1 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND AQUISITION) GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101 2 THE ADMINSITRATOR, GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101 3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR-680001**
**BY ADVS.SMT.N.SUDHADEVI, SPL.GP FOR R1 AND R3 SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SC FOR R2**
**THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**11**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
## **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
## **&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
## **1944**
**LA.APP. NO. 552 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.01.2014 IN LAR 23/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **APPELLANT/CLAIMANT:**
**P.K. RAVEENDRAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA P., PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, GURUVAYOOR - 680 101. BY ADVS.P.B.KRISHNAN P.B.SUBRAMANYAN SABU GEORGE MANU VYASAN PETER**
## **RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:**
|**1**|**THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR**|
|---|---|
||**(LAND ACQUISITION),**|
||**GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM,**|
||**GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR - 680 101.**|
|**2**|**THE ADMINISTRATOR**|
||**GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM,**|
||**GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR - 680 101.**|
|**3**|**THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR**|
||**THRISSUR - 680 001.**|
**BY ADVS.SMT.N.SUDHADEVI, SPL.GP FOR R1 AND R3 SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SC FOR R2**
**THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**12**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
# **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
## **&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
**1944**
**LA.APP. NO. 553 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.01.2014 IN LAR 36/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **APPELLANT/CLAIMANT:**
**P.K.RAVEENDRAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA.P, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, GURUVAYOOR-680 101. BY ADVS.P.B.KRISHNAN P.B.SUBRAMANYAN SABU GEORGE MANU VYASAN PETER(K/000652/2013)**
## **RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:**
|**1**|**THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION)**|
|---|---|
||**GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680**|
||**101.**|
|**2**|**THE ADMINISTRATOR**|
||**GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680**|
||**101.**|
|**3**|**THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR**|
||**THRISSUR-680 001.**|
**BY ADVS.SMT.N.SUDHADEVI, SPL.GP FOR R1 AND R3 SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SC FOR R2**
**THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**13**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
**1944**
**LA.APP. NO. 554 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.01.2014 IN LAR 22/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **APPELLANT/CLAIMANT:**
**P.K. JAYARAJAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA P., PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, 24/375, POONKUNNAM POST, THRISSUR-680 002. BY ADVS.SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN KUM.R.ANJALI SHRI.AJIT G ANJARLEKAR SHRI.S.RAJMOHAN SMT.V.M.RUSHDA RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: 1 THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION), GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR 680101. 2 THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680 101. 3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680 001. BY ADVS.SMT.N.SUDHADEVI, SPL.GP FOR R1 AND R3 SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SC FOR R2**
## **RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:**
**THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**14**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA, 1944**
**LA.APP. NO. 555 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.01.2015 IN LAR 34/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **APPELLANT/CLAIMANT:**
**P.K.RAVEENDRAN S/O. LATE KUTTAPPA.P., PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, GURUVAYOOR-680101. BY ADVS.P.B.KRISHNAN P.B.SUBRAMANYAN SABU GEORGE MANU VYASAN PETER**
## **RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:**
|**1**|**THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION)**|
|---|---|
||**GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR 680**|
||**101.**|
|**2**|**THE ADMINISTRATOR**|
||**GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM,**|
||**GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR 680101.**|
|**3**|**THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR**|
||**THRISSUR 680001.**|
**BY ADVS.SMT.N.SUDHADEVI, SPL.GP FOR R1 AND R3 SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SC FOR R2**
**THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**15**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
**PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
## **&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
**1944**
**LA.APP. NO. 654 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 15.01.2014 IN LAR 21/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **APPELLANT/CLAIMANT:**
**M.MOHAN KUMAR S/O MANIKKATH VISALAKSHI AMMA, MANIKKATH HOUSE, GURUVAYOOR.P.O, BY ADV SRI.SASTHAMANGALAM S. AJITHKUMAR**
## **RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:**
**1 THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (LA) GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101.**
**2 THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR-680101.**
**3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680001.**
**BY ADVS.SMT.N.SUDHADEVI, SPL.GP FOR R1 AND R3 SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SC FOR R2**
**THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**16**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
## **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
## **&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA**
**TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
**1944**
**OP(C) NO. 1414 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN LAR 26/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **PETITIONER:**
**THE ADMINISTRATOR, GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR-680101. BY ADV SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON**
## **RESPONDENTS:**
- **1 P.K.JAYARAJAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA P, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, 24/375, P.O.POONKUNNAM, THRISSUR-680002.**
- **2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR-680101.**
- **3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680003. BY ADV SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.A.J. VARGHESE, SR.GP.**
**THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**17**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
# **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
**1944**
**OP(C) NO. 1477 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN LAR 23/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **PETITIONER:**
**THE ADMINISTRATOR, GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR. BY ADVS.SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON SRI.DINESH THANKAPPAN SMT.P.VIJAYAMMA**
## **RESPONDENTS:**
- **1 P.K.RAVEENDRAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA P., PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, GURUVAYUR-680 101.**
- **2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR-680 101.**
- **3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680 003. BY ADV SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN**
**THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**18**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
## **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
## **&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
## **1944**
**OP(C) NO. 1478 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN LAR 22/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **PETITIONER:**
**THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR. BY ADVS.SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON SMT.P.VIJAYAMMA**
## **RESPONDENTS:**
- **1 P.K. JAYARAJAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA P, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, 24/375, P.O.POONKUNNAM, THRISSUR-680 002.**
- **2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR, PIN-680 101.**
- **3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680003. BY ADV SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.A.J.VARGHESE, SR.G.P**
**THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**19**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
**PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
**1944**
**OP(C) NO. 1479 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN LAR 34/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **PETITIONER:**
**THE ADMINISTRATOR, GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM GURUVAYUR-680 002 BY ADVS.SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON SRI.DINESH THANKAPPAN SMT.P.VIJAYAMMA**
## **RESPONDENTS:**
- **1 P.K.RAVEENDRAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA P, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE,GURUVAYUR,PIN 680002**
- **2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDARLA (LA) GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR,PIN 680 101**
- **3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR - 680003 BY ADV SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN**
**THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON**
**15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**20**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
**PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
**1944**
**OP(C) NO. 1480 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN LAR 33/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, THRISSUR**
## **PETITIONER:**
**THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR. BY ADVS.SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON SMT.DEVI.C.HARIDAS SMT.P.VIJAYAMMA**
## **RESPONDENTS:**
- **1 P.K RAVEENDRAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA P., PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, GURUVAYUR-680 101**
- **2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR-680 101.**
- **3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680 003. BY ADV SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.A.J.VARGHESE, SR.G.P**
**THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**21**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
## **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
## **&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
**1944**
**OP(C) NO. 1496 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN LAR 25/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **PETITIONER:**
**THE ADMINISTRATOR, GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM GURUVAYUR BY ADVS.SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON SRI.DINESH THANKAPPAN**
## **RESPONDENTS:**
- **1 P.K. JAYARAJAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA P , PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, 24/375, P O POONKUNNAM, THRISSUR-680002**
- **2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR, PIN-680101**
- **3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680003 BY ADV SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.A.J.VARGHESE, SR.G.P**
**THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**22**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
## **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
## **&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
**1944**
**OP(C) NO. 1497 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN LAR 35/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **PETITIONER:**
**THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR. BY ADVS.SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON SRI.DINESH THANKAPPAN SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS**
## **RESPONDENTS:**
- **1 P.K. RAVEENDRAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA P, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, GURUVAYUR, PIN 680101.**
- **2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR, PIN 680101.**
- **3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680003. BY ADVS.SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.A.J.VARGHESE, SR.G.P**
**THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**23**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
## **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
## **&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
## **1944**
**OP(C) NO. 1498 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN LAR 28/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **PETITIONER:**
**THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR BY ADVS.SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON SMT.DEVI.C.HARIDAS SMT.P.VIJAYAMMA**
## **RESPONDENTS:**
- **1 P.K.JAYARAJAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA P , PUTHUSSERY HOUE, 24/375, P O POONKUNNAM, THRISSUR-680002**
- **2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR, PIN-680101**
- **3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680003 BY ADV SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.A.J.VARGHESE, SR.G.P**
**THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**24**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
## **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
## **&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
## **1944**
**OP(C) NO. 1499 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN LAR 29/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **PETITIONER:**
**THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR BY ADVS.SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON SMT.P.VIJAYAMMA**
## **RESPONDENTS:**
- **1 P.K.JAYARAJAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA.P, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, 24/375, P O POONKUNNAM, THRISSUR-680002**
- **2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR, PIN-680101,**
- **3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680003 BY ADV SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.A.J.VARGHESE, SR.G.P**
**THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**25**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
# **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
**1944**
**OP(C) NO. 1500 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN LAR 27/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **PETITIONER:**
**THE ADMINISTRATOR, GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR. BY ADVS.SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON SMT.P.VIJAYAMMA**
## **RESPONDENTS:**
- **1 P.K.JAYARAJAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA P, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, 24/375, P.O.POONKUNNAM, THRISSUR-680002.**
- **2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR, PIN 680101.**
- **3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR - 680003. BY ADV SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.A.J.VARGHESE, SR.G.P**
**THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON**
**15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**26**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
**PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
**1944**
**OP(C) NO. 1509 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN LAR 36/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, THRISSUR**
## **PETITIONER:**
**THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM,GURUVAYUR BY ADVS.SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON SMT.DEVI.C.HARIDAS**
## **RESPONDENTS:**
- **1 P.K. RAVEENDRAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA P, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE,GURUVAYUR,PIN 680 101**
- **2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDR (LA) GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR,PIN 680 101**
- **3 THE DISTRICT COLELCTOR THRISSUR 680003 BY ADV SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.A.J.VARGHESE, SR.G.P**
**THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**27**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
## **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
## **&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA**
**TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
## **1944**
**OP(C) NO. 1510 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN LAR 30/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **PETITIONER:**
**THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR. BY ADVS.SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON SMT.J.SURYA**
## **RESPONDENTS:**
- **1 P.K. JAYARAJAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA.P., PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, 23/375, P.O.POONKUNNAM, THRISSUR-680002.**
- **2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR, PIN-680101.**
- **3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680 003. BY ADV SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.A.J.VARGHESE, SR.G.P**
**THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**28**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
**PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
**1944**
**OP(C) NO. 1511 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN LAR 32/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **PETITIONER:**
**THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR. BY ADVS.SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON SMT.DEVI.C.HARIDAS**
## **RESPONDENTS:**
- **1 P.K. RAVEENDRAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA.P., PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, GURUVAYUR, PIN-680101.**
- **2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR, PIN-680101.**
- **3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680003. BY ADV SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.A.J.VARGHESE SR.G.P**
**THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**29**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
# **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
**1944**
**OP(C) NO. 1512 OF 2014**
**AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN LAR 21/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **PETITIONER:**
**THE ADMINISTRATOR, GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM GURUVAYUR. BY ADVS.SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON SMT.DEVI.C.HARIDAS**
## **RESPONDENTS:**
- **1 M. MOHANKUMAR S/O.MANIKATH VISALAKSHI AMMA, GURUVAYUR P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT.**
- **2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR, PIN-680101.**
- **3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR - 680003.**
**BY ADVS.SRI.SASTHAMANGALAM S. AJITHKUMAR SRI.V.S.THOSHIN SRI A.J.VARGHESE SR.G.P.**
**THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**30**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
# **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 24TH KARTHIKA,**
**1944**
**OP(C) NO. 1513 OF 2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN LAR 31/2010 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR**
## **PETITIONER:**
**THE ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR. BY ADVS.SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON SMT.DEVI.C.HARIDAS**
## **RESPONDENTS:**
- **1 P.K. RAVEENDRAN S/O.LATE KUTTAPPA.P., PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, GURUVAYUR, PIN-680101.**
- **2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR, PIN-680101.**
- **3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680003. BY ADV SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.A.J.VARGHESE SR.G.P.**
**THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2022, ALONG WITH LA.App..528/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**31**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **P.B.SURESH KUMAR & C.S.SUDHA, JJ.**
**------------------------------------------------------------------------LAA. Nos.528/2014, 529/2014, 530/2014, 531/2014, 532/2014, 544/2014, 545/2014, 546/2014, 550/2014, 551/2014, 552/2014, 553/2014, 554/2014, 555/2014 and 654/2014 &**
**OP(C) Nos.1414/2014, 1477/2014, 1478/2014, 1479/2014, 1480/2014, 1496/2014, 1497/2014, 1498/2014, 1499/2014, 1500/2014, 1509/2014, 1510/2014, 1511/2014, 1512/2014 and 1513/2014**
**---------------------------------------------------Dated this the 15[th] day of November, 2022**
## **J U D G M E N T**
## **C.S.Sudha, J.**
These land acquisition appeals under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act) have been filed by the claimants in 15 LAR cases, namely, LAR Nos.21/2010, 22/2010, 23/2010, 25/2010, 26/2010, 27/2010, 28/2010, 29/2010, 30/2010, 31/2010, 32/2010, 33/2010, 34/2010, 35/2010 and 36/2010, aggrieved by the common judgment dated 15/01/2014. The parties and the documents in the appeals will be referred to as described in LAR cases.
2. 91.70 ares of land situated in Guruvayoor Village, Chavakkad Taluk, Thrissur Distrct, owned and possessed by the claimants was
**32**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
acquired under the Act for the expansion of Guruvayoor Devaswom English medium School. On the basis of the survey numbers, the total land was divided into 14 plots and 14 land acquisition cases were registered. An extent of 5.90 ares, which is equal to 14.573 cents was acquired from the claimant in LAR No.21/2010. The claimants in the remaining 14 LAR cases, namely, P.K.Jayarajan and P.K.Raveendran are brothers, from whom 85.80 ares, which is equal to 211.926 cents has been acquired. The Land Acquisition Officer (LAO) fixed compensation @ ₹1,20,000/- per cent and by Award no.1/2010 dated 28/05/2010, granted total compensation of ₹2,78,31,615/- which includes the value of land @ ₹2,96,400/- per are; the value of improvements and the value of structures. Dissatisfied with the amount awarded, the claimants sought a reference under Section 18 of the Act, based on which proceedings under Section 19 was initiated by the LAO, pursuant to which the aforesaid 14 LAR cases were registered under Section 18 of the Act.
3. The notification under Section 4(1) of the Act published on 10/11/1999 was challenged by the claimants, except the claimant in LAR No.21/2010, by filing O.P.No.34264/2000 before this Court. By order
**33**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
dated 07/12/2000 in C.M.P.No.58564/2000, the land acquisition proceeding was stayed. The stay order was vacated when the aforesaid OP was dismissed on 16/07/2008. Review Petition No.1384/2008 filed to review the order dated 16/07/2008 was dismissed as per order dated 23/01/2009. While dismissing the review petition it was been held that as the acquisition had been held up for long on account of the litigation and stay, the petitioners would be entitled to claim compensation at the market price prevalent at the time of dispossession. Against the order of dismissal of the review petition, the petitioners moved the Apex Court by filing Civil Appeal No.9481/2009, which in turn has been dismissed by order dated 04/05/2012.
3.1. The claimant in LAR No.21/2010 filed O.P.(C) No.24102/2010 challenging the acquisition proceedings alleging that while he would be given land value only at the rate prevailing in 1999, i.e., at the time of Section 4(1) notification, the petitioners in R.P.No.1384/2008 were likely to be given compensation based on the market price prevailing as on the date of dispossession. This Court held that the challenge will have to fail as the acquisition had been completed and an Award passed.
**34**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
However, it was clarified that the claim of the petitioner that he is also entitled to the benefits if any granted to the other claimants, could be urged by him before the Land Acquisition Reference Court (LAR court). The writ petition was thus disposed of leaving all matters open.
4. The LAO was not inclined to accept or abide by the direction in R.P.No.1384/2008, though the same had been brought to his notice. On the other hand, compensation was fixed @ ₹1,20,000/- per cent relying on Ext.B2 sale deed dated 06/01/1998, though the value in the deed is ₹1,50,000/- per cent. The LAR court as per order in I.A.No.3315/2011 ordered joint trial of all the cases and LAR No.22/2010 was taken as the leading case, in which case the evidence was recorded. PWs.1 to 6 were examined and Exts.A1 to A11 were marked on the side of the claimants. RW1 was examined and Exts.B1 to B13 series were marked on behalf of the respondents. Exts.C1 and C2 were also marked.
5. Before the LAR court, the claimant in LAR No.21/2010 claimed compensation @ ₹10 lakhs per cent, whereas the remaining claimants claimed compensation @ ₹15 lakhs per cent. To substantiate the claim for compensation at the rates claimed by the claimants, they relied
**35**
## **LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
on Exts.A2, A3, A4 and A7 sale deeds. According to them, the market value of land even as on the date of Section 4(1) notification, that is, on 13/12/1999 was ₹4 lakhs per cent and therefore fixation of land value @ ₹1,20,000/- per cent by the LAO based on Ext.B2 is not justified. It was also contended that the property covered by Ext.B2 is not a similarly situated or property similar to the acquired property and hence the same cannot be made the basis for fixation of market value. The LAR court refused to rely on the documents produced by the claimants to substantiate their claim that the property would fetch much higher compensation. According to the court, the claimants had not taken the advocate commissioner or the expert to Ext.B2 property and therefore the latter would not be in a position to say whether the said property and the acquired property are similar or similarly situated properties and hence found no reasons to discard or reject Ext. B2 deed. Observing so, Ext.B2 was accepted as the basic document for fixing the market value of the land. The value of land as per Ext.B2 is ₹1,50,000/- per cent. Hence the LAR court found that the LAO had without any basis reduced the value to ₹1,20,000/- per cent. As Ext.B2 is dated 06/01/1998 and as Section 4(1)
**36**
## **LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
notification dated 13/12/1999 is more than a year after the said deed, 20% increase in the value was given, that is, ₹30,000/- and the land value of the acquired land in LAR No.21/2010 was fixed @ ₹1,80,000/- per cent. The LAR court refused to give effect to the direction in the order in R.P.No.1384/2008 to this claimant on the ground that he is not a party to the said proceedings. For the remaining claimants, compensation has been awarded @ ₹5 lakhs per cent. The LAR court took the land value as on the date of section 4(1) notification as ₹1,80,000/- per cent and converted it to the value of land as on 29/06/2010, that is, the date of dispossession, by giving 15% increase per year for 11 years. When so calculated, the amount comes to ₹4,70,000/- per cent. Taking note of the fact that the documents relied on by the claimants indicated steep rise in land value, fixed the value @ ₹ 5 lakhs per cent.
6. The compensation fixed by the LAR court is assailed by all the claimants in the LARs. The claimant in LAR No.21/2010 is claiming compensation @ ₹10 lakhs per cent whereas the remaining claimants have limited their claim to ₹9 lakhs per cent. Guruvayoor Devaswom aggrieved by the enhancement of compensation granted has filed the aforesaid
**37**
## **LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
O.P.s(C) under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the aforesaid common judgment in the LARs.
7. Heard Advs.S.Radhakrishnan and P.B.Krishnan, the learned counsel for the appellants, Adv.N.Sudhadevi, the learned Special Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 3 and Adv.T.K.Vipindas, the learned Standing Counsel for Guruvayoor Devaswom.
8. We will first consider whether the Administrator, Guruvayoor Devaswom Board, the first respondent in the appeals, can move under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging the impugned judgment. The prayer in the original petitions stated to be filed under Article 227 is to call for the records and the proceedings of the LAR court in the cases and to “ _quash the said proceedings as being wrong, absolutely without jurisdiction and unsustainable by issuing a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction_ ”. The learned Standing counsel for the Guruvayoor-Devaswom when asked about the maintainability of the petitions submitted that the same is maintainable as the procedure adopted by the LAR court is illegal and wrong. According to him, two different rates of compensation have been awarded for similar and similarly situated land and also that compensation fixed by the court is against the provisions
**38**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
of the Act and so the petitions, are perfectly maintainable.
9. We cannot but disagree with the argument advanced. In granting a writ of 'certiorari', the superior court does not exercise the power of an appellate tribunal ( **C. Basappa v. T. Nagappa** , **AIR 1954 SC 440).** One of the essential features of the writ, is that the control which is exercised through it over judicial or quasi-judicial Tribunals or bodies is not in appellate but supervisory capacity. (See also **K.C.T.Steel Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Kerala, 2016(4) KHC 336** ). In **Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1967 SC 1** the Apex court held that certiorari does not lie to quash the judgments of inferior courts of civil jurisdiction.
9.1. Further, Section 54 of the Act says that subject to the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, applicable to appeals from original decrees, and notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any enactment for the time being in force, an appeal shall only lie in any proceedings under this Act to the High Court from the Award, or from any part of the Award of the Court and from any decree of the High Court passed on such appeal as aforesaid an appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court subject to the provisions contained in Section 110 of the Code and in Order
**39**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
XLIV thereof. Therefore, if the Guruvayoor Devaswom was in any way aggrieved by the impugned judgment, they ought to have filed an appeal against the same.
9.2. Here we refer to the decisions cited on behalf of the claimants in support of their challenge to the petitions. In **Sadhana Lodh v. National Insurance Company Ltd.,** ( **2003)3 SCC 524** , the Apex Court has held that the right of appeal is a statutory right and where the law provides remedy by filing an appeal, the grounds of challenge cannot be enlarged by filing a petition under Article 226/227 on the premise that there are only limited grounds available for appeal. In **Radhey Shyam v.**
**Shhabi Nath, AIR 2015 SC 3269** it has been held that even where a remedy by way of an appeal has not been provided, the remedy available to the aggrieved persons is to file a revision before the High Court under Section 115 of the C.P.C. Where remedy for filing a revision before the High Court under Section 115 of C.P.C has been expressly barred by any enactment, only in such case a petition under Article 227 would lie and not under Article 226 of the Constitution. It has further been held that judicial orders of civil courts are not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article
**40**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
226. The three Judges' Bench in **Radhey Shyam** ( _Supra_ ) overruled the decision in **Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai, AIR 2003 SC 3044** which held to the contrary.
9.3. In **Virudhunagar Hindu Nadargal Dharma Paribalana Sabai v. Tuticorin Educational Society, 2019(9) SCC 538,** it has been held that where a remedy of appeal is available to the aggrieved person, the same shall deter the High Court, not merely as a measure of self-imposed restriction, but as a matter of discipline and prudence, from exercising its power of superintendence under the Constitution. The availability of an appellate remedy may have to be construed as a near total bar for initiating proceedings under Article 227 of the Constitution. In **Muhamed Ali v. V.Jaya, MANU/SC/0863/2022** it has been held that when there is a statutory alternative remedy by way of an appeal available to the aggrieved person, the High Court shall not entertain a writ under Article 227. That being the position, the original petitions filed by the Guruvayoor Devaswom are not maintainable and hence liable to be dismissed.
10. Now coming to the appeals. The point to be considered is whether the claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation as claimed by
**41**
## **LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
them and whether there is any infirmity in the findings of the LAR court. Before we go into the finding relating to the fixation of compensation, we shall deal with the direction contained in R.P.No.1384/2008. The review petition was dismissed with a rider which reads – “ _…. However, since acquisition was held up for long on account of litigation and stay was granted by this Court, certainly petitioners will be entitled to claim compensation at market price prevalent at the time of dispossession.”_ According to the learned Standing counsel, the aforesaid order is a void order and hence not binding on the LAR Court. The court ought to have decided or fixed the compensation in accordance with the provisions contained in the Act, that is, the market value that prevailed as on the date of Section 4(1) notification. Reference was made to the decision in **Sarup Singh v. Union of India, (2011)11 SCC 198,** in support of the argument that a void order is not binding and ought to have been ignored by the LAR Court. On the other hand, it was pointed out by the learned counsel for the claimants that when the review petition was dismissed, the matter had been taken up in appeal before the Apex Court. The matter had come up before the Apex Court on several posting dates. Though the Guruvayoor Devaswom was well aware of the
**42**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
direction in the review petition, they never challenged the same in spite of the fact that they had entered appearance in the said appeal. This according to the learned counsel would go to show that Guruvayoor Devaswam had accepted the direction contained in the review petition and had no grievance against the same. The said direction has now become final and hence they cannot be heard to contend that the same was not binding on the LAR Court. In support of this argument, reference was made to the decisions in **Gorie Gouri Naidu v. Thandrothu Bodemma, (1997)2 SCC 552** and **Reddy Veerana v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 2022 SC 2225** .
10.1. In **Gorie Gouri Naidu** _(Supra) it_ has been held that interparties’ judgment rendered by court of competent jurisdiction, even if erroneous would bind the parties. In **Reddy Veerana** _(Supra)_ it has been held that it is a settled position that law favours finality to binding judicial decisions pronounced by courts that are competent to deal with the subjectmatter. Public interest is against individuals being vexed twice over with the same kind of litigation. The binding character of the judgments pronounced by the courts of competent jurisdiction has always been treated
**43**
## **LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
as an essential part of the rule of law which is the basis of the administration of justice in this country on which the Constitution lays so much emphasis.
10.2. In **Sarup Singh** _(Supra)_ relied on behalf of the Devaswom, it has been held that it is well settled law that a decree passed by a court without jurisdiction on the subject - matter or on the grounds on which the decree made which goes to the root of its jurisdiction or lacks inherent jurisdiction is a coram non judice. A decree passed by such a court is a nullity and is non-est. Its invalidity can be set up whenever it is sought to be enforced or is acted upon as a foundation for a right, even at the stage of execution or in collateral proceedings. The defect of jurisdiction strikes at the very authority of the court to pass decree which cannot be cured by consent or waiver of the party.
10.3. As far as the case on hand is concerned, it cannot be said that this court lacked inherent jurisdiction on the subject matter. The direction given in the review petition may be a wrong order. At best it can be said to be a wrong order of a competent court. Even assuming for a moment that it is a void order, the same ought to have been challenged. Whenever an
**44**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
adverse order is passed against a person, unless the same is challenged before the appropriate forum, within the prescribed time limit, the said order will become final and the person affected by it will also be bound by it. Law is settled that even a void order should be declared to be void and unenforceable by a superior judicial forum. A wrong decision of a court having jurisdiction is as much binding between the parties as a right one and is superseded only by appeals to higher tribunals or other procedure like review which the law provides. It is now fairly settled that a wrong decision of a court having jurisdiction is as much binding between the parties as a right one and is superseded only by appeals to higher tribunals or other procedure like review which the law provides ( **State of West Bengal v. Hemant Kumar. AIR 1966 SC 1061** ; **Krishnadevi Malchand Kamathia v. Bombay Environmental Action Group, AIR 2011 SC 1140; M. Meenakshi v. Metadin Agarwal, (2006)7 SCC 470; Custodian Vested Forest Palakkad v. P.V.Kunhiraman, 2018(3) KHC 768** ).
10.4. That being the position the LAR court was bound to follow the direction contained in the review petition and so could not have ignored the same as argued on behalf of the respondents.
**45**
## **LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
11. Admittedly, the property of the claimant in LAR No.21/2010 is an adjacent and property similar to that of the property of the other claimants. Therefore, a different yardstick cannot be adopted for computing the compensation due to the said claimant. It is true that in the review petition, the said claimant is not a party. In the writ petition filed by him, this Court has not found or held that he is not entitled to the benefit that has been granted to the other claimants. The matter had been left open to be considered by the LAR court. As his land is similar and situated adjacent to the property of the other claimants, the same will have to be treated equally and similarly and compensation fixed accordingly.
12. Now coming to the question whether the claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation as claimed by them. As noticed earlier, the date of Section 4(1) notification is 13/12/1999 and the date of dispossession is 29/06/2010. Ext.B2 sale deed dated 06/01/1998, is apparently more than a year before Section 4(1) notification and more than two years before the date of dispossession. Exts.A2, A3 and A4 sale deeds are relied on by the claimants to substantiate their claim that the acquired property would fetch much higher value. Ext.A7 dated 23/08/2012 is much after the date of
**46**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
dispossession. Therefore, the same cannot be taken into consideration. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the claimants that Ext.A7 is relied on only for the purpose of showing that the price of land in the area was galloping or that there was a sharp increase in price during the relevant time. Ext.A4 dated 11/11/2010 is also after the date of dispossession, so the same also need not be taken into consideration. As far as Ext.A3 dated 23/01/2010 is concerned, the same appears to be situated in a slightly interior area as compared to the acquired land. This is clear from Ext.C1 commission report which report is not seen discredited. The fact that the acquired land is situated in an important residential cum commercial area close to the Guruvayoor temple, surrounded by important private and public institutions and near the bus stand, is an admitted fact. It has road frontage also. As the property covered by Ext.A3 is situated in a slightly interior place as compared to the acquired land, the same cannot also be made use of for fixing the market value of the acquired land.
13. Now coming to Ext.A2 dated 15/05/2008, which is obviously dated about two years before the date of dispossession. The property in Ext.A2 sale deed is seen to have been sold at the rate of ₹9,23,526/- per
**47**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
cent. The reasons given by the LAR Court for rejecting Ext.A2, does not appear to be cogent or correct. The said property is stated to be situated about 400 meters away from the temple. According to the LAR Court, the vendor in Ext.A2 document was never examined and so the respondents never got an opportunity to cross examine her; that RW1, the Revenue Inspector, who had done the assessment work deposed that the acquired land is situated about one kilometer away from the temple and so Ext.A2 property cannot be compared with the acquired land, though Ext.C1 report of PW3, the expert, supports the case of the claimants that both the properties are similar. If that be so, how was Ext.B2 deed taken as the basic document, without examining the vendor? Exts.C1 and C2 are the reports filed by the expert commissioner. In Ext.C1 it is reported that Ext.A2 property is situated at a distance of about 200 meters away from the acquired land and that it is a similarly situated property. PW3 is not seen cross examined on the aforesaid points reported by him. His report has not been discredited in any way. Therefore, when two years before the date of dispossession, if land similarly situated could fetch ₹9 and odd lakhs per cent, the acquired land would certainly have fetched more value
**48**
## **LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
on the date of dispossession. When Ext.A2 was very much available and which was closer to the year of dispossession, it was quite unnecessary to rely on Ext.B2 document executed about ten years before the date of dispossession and then give it a 15% increase every year to arrive at the proper compensation as has been done by the LAR Court. The fact that the price of land during the said time was soaring was noticed by the LAR court also. Considering the price of land seen in Ext. A2, A3, A4 as well as in Ext.A7, we think that compensation @ of ₹9,00,000/- per cent claimed is reasonable. As the land in LAR No.21/2010 is also a similar land situated adjacent to the property of the other claimants, the claimant in the said case is also entitled to compensation @ ₹9,00,000/- per cent. That being the position, the judgment and decree of the LAR Court to the said extent needs modification.
In the result, LAA No.654/2014 is partly allowed and all other appeals are allowed and it is found that the claimants are entitled to compensation @ ₹9,00,000/- per cent for the acquired land. To the said extent, the judgment and decree in the Land Acquisition Appeals shall stand modified.
**49**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
The Original Petitions (C) are found not maintainable and hence
shall stand dismissed.
Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
Sd/-
**P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE**
Sd/-
**C.S.SUDHA JUDGE**
ami/Jms
**50**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
**APPENDIX OF LA APPEAL NO.528/2014**
**APPELLANT'S ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A A TABLE SHOWING VALUE OF THE PROPERTY IN THE EXEMPLARS IN THE LAR PROCEEDINGS. ANNEXURE B SITE PLAN OF THE ACQUIRED PROPERTY ANNEXURE C A TABLE SHOWING THE VALUATION OF IMPROVEMENTS BY THE LAQ, LAR AND THE AMOUNT CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT.**
**51**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF LA APPEAL NO.529/2014**
|**APPELLANT'S **|**ANNEXURES**|
|---|---|
|**ANNEXURE A**|**A TABLE SHOWING VALUE OF THE PROPERTY**|
||**IN THE EXEMPLARS IN THE LAR**|
||**PROCEEDINGS.**|
|**ANNEXURE B**|**SITE PLAN OF THE ACQUIRED PROPERTY**|
|**ANNEXURE C**|**A TABLE SHOWING THE VALUATION OF**|
||**IMPROVEMENTS BY THE LAQ, LAR AND THE**|
||**AMOUNT CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT.**|
**52**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF LA APPEAL NO.530/2014**
|**APPELLANT'S **|**ANNEXURES**|
|---|---|
|**ANNEXURE A**|**A TABLE SHOWING VALUE OF THE PROPERTY**|
||**IN THE EXEMPLARS IN THE LAR**|
||**PROCEEDINGS.**|
|**ANNEXURE B**|**SITE PLAN OF THE ACQUIRED PROPERTY**|
|**ANNEXURE C**|**A TABLE SHOWING THE VALUATION OF**|
||**IMPROVEMENTS BY THE LAQ, LAR AND THE**|
||**AMOUNT CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT.**|
**53**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF LA APPEAL NO.531/2014**
|**APPELLANT'S **|**ANNEXURES**|
|---|---|
|**ANNEXURE A**|**A TABLE SHOWING VALUE OF THE PROPERTY**|
||**IN THE EXEMPLARS IN THE LAR**|
||**PROCEEDINGS.**|
|**ANNEXURE B**|**SITE PLAN OF THE ACQUIRED PROPERTY**|
|**ANNEXURE C**|**A TABLE SHOWING THE VALUATION OF**|
||**IMPROVEMENTS BY THE LAQ, LAR AND THE**|
||**AMOUNT CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT.**|
**54**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF LA APPEAL NO.532/2014**
|**APPELLANT'S **|**ANNEXURES**|
|---|---|
|**ANNEXURE A**|**A TABLE SHOWING VALUE OF THE PROPERTY**|
||**IN THE EXEMPLARS IN THE LAR**|
||**PROCEEDINGS.**|
|**ANNEXURE B**|**SITE PLAN OF THE ACQUIRED PROPERTY**|
|**ANNEXURE C**|**A TABLE SHOWING THE VALUATION OF**|
||**IMPROVEMENTS BY THE LAQ, LAR AND THE**|
||**AMOUNT CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT.**|
**55**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF LA APPEAL NO.544/2014**
|**APPELLANT'S **|**ANNEXURES**|
|---|---|
|**ANNEXURE A**|**A TABLE SHOWING VALUE OF THE PROPERTY**|
||**IN THE EXEMPLARS IN THE LAR**|
||**PROCEEDINGS.**|
|**ANNEXURE B**|**SITE PLAN OF THE ACQUIRED PROPERTY**|
|**ANNEXURE C**|**A TABLE SHOWING THE VALUATION OF**|
||**IMPROVEMENTS BY THE LAQ, LAR AND THE**|
||**AMOUNT CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT.**|
**56**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF LA APPEAL NO.545/2014**
|**APPELLANT'S **|**ANNEXURES**|
|---|---|
|**ANNEXURE A**|**A TABLE SHOWING VALUE OF THE PROPERTY**|
||**IN THE EXEMPLARS IN THE LAR**|
||**PROCEEDINGS.**|
|**ANNEXURE B**|**SITE PLAN OF THE ACQUIRED PROPERTY**|
|**ANNEXURE C**|**A TABLE SHOWING THE VALUATION OF**|
||**IMPROVEMENTS BY THE LAQ, LAR AND THE**|
||**AMOUNT CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT.**|
**57**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF LA APPEAL NO.546/2014**
|**APPELLANT'S **|**ANNEXURES**|
|---|---|
|**ANNEXURE A**|**A TABLE SHOWING VALUE OF THE PROPERTY**|
||**IN THE EXEMPLARS IN THE LAR**|
||**PROCEEDINGS.**|
|**ANNEXURE B**|**SITE PLAN OF THE ACQUIRED PROPERTY**|
|**ANNEXURE C**|**A TABLE SHOWING THE VALUATION OF**|
||**IMPROVEMENTS BY THE LAQ, LAR AND THE**|
||**AMOUNT CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT.**|
**58**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF LA APPEAL NO.550/2014**
|**APPELLANT'S **|**ANNEXURES**|
|---|---|
|**ANNEXURE A**|**A TABLE SHOWING VALUE OF THE PROPERTY**|
||**IN THE EXEMPLARS IN THE LAR**|
||**PROCEEDINGS.**|
|**ANNEXURE B**|**SITE PLAN OF THE ACQUIRED PROPERTY**|
|**ANNEXURE C**|**A TABLE SHOWING THE VALUATION OF**|
||**IMPROVEMENTS BY THE LAQ, LAR AND THE**|
||**AMOUNT CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT.**|
**59**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF LA APPEAL NO.551/2014**
|**APPELLANT'S **|**ANNEXURES**|
|---|---|
|**ANNEXURE A**|**A TABLE SHOWING VALUE OF THE PROPERTY**|
||**IN THE EXEMPLARS IN THE LAR**|
||**PROCEEDINGS.**|
|**ANNEXURE B**|**SITE PLAN OF THE ACQUIRED PROPERTY**|
|**ANNEXURE C**|**A TABLE SHOWING THE VALUATION OF**|
||**IMPROVEMENTS BY THE LAQ, LAR AND THE**|
||**AMOUNT CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT.**|
**60**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF LA APPEAL NO.552/2014**
|**APPELLANT'S **|**ANNEXURES**|
|---|---|
|**ANNEXURE A**|**A TABLE SHOWING VALUE OF THE PROPERTY**|
||**IN THE EXEMPLARS IN THE LAR**|
||**PROCEEDINGS.**|
|**ANNEXURE B**|**SITE PLAN OF THE ACQUIRED PROPERTY**|
|**ANNEXURE C**|**A TABLE SHOWING THE VALUATION OF**|
||**IMPROVEMENTS BY THE LAQ, LAR AND THE**|
||**AMOUNT CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT.**|
**61**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF LA APPEAL NO.553/2014**
|**APPELLANT'S **|**ANNEXURES**|
|---|---|
|**ANNEXURE A**|**A TABLE SHOWING VALUE OF THE PROPERTY**|
||**IN THE EXEMPLARS IN THE LAR**|
||**PROCEEDINGS.**|
|**ANNEXURE B**|**SITE PLAN OF THE ACQUIRED PROPERTY**|
|**ANNEXURE C**|**A TABLE SHOWING THE VALUATION OF**|
||**IMPROVEMENTS BY THE LAQ, LAR AND THE**|
||**AMOUNT CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT.**|
**62**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF LA APPEAL NO.554/2014**
|**APPELLANT'S **|**ANNEXURES**|
|---|---|
|**ANNEXURE A**|**A TABLE SHOWING VALUE OF THE PROPERTY**|
||**IN THE EXEMPLARS IN THE LAR**|
||**PROCEEDINGS.**|
|**ANNEXURE B**|**SITE PLAN OF THE ACQUIRED PROPERTY**|
|**ANNEXURE C**|**A TABLE SHOWING THE VALUATION OF**|
||**IMPROVEMENTS BY THE LAQ, LAR AND THE**|
||**AMOUNT CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT.**|
**63**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF LA APPEAL NO.555/2014**
|**APPELLANT'S **|**ANNEXURES**|
|---|---|
|**ANNEXURE A**|**A TABLE SHOWING VALUE OF THE PROPERTY**|
||**IN THE EXEMPLARS IN THE LAR**|
||**PROCEEDINGS.**|
|**ANNEXURE B**|**SITE PLAN OF THE ACQUIRED PROPERTY**|
|**ANNEXURE C**|**A TABLE SHOWING THE VALUATION OF**|
||**IMPROVEMENTS BY THE LAQ, LAR AND THE**|
||**AMOUNT CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT.**|
**64**
## **LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1414/2014**
## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS**
**EXHIBIT -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 16.7.2008. EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN R.P.NO.1384 OF 2008 IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 23.1.2009. EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN LAR NO.26 OF 2010 AND CONNECTED CASES.**
**65**
## **LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1477/2014**
## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS**
**EXHIBIT -P1**
**EXHIBIT -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 16.7.2008. EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN R.P.NO.1384 OF 2008 IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 23.1.2009. EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN LAR NO.23 OF 2010 AND CONNECTED CASES. EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN OP(C)NO.1414 OF 2014 DATED 25.6.2014 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT.**
**66**
## **LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1478/2014**
## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS**
**EXHIBIT -P1**
**EXHIBIT -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 16.7.2008. EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN R.P.NO.1384 OF 2008 IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 23.1.2009. EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN LAR NO.22 OF 2010 AND CONNECTED CASES. EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN OP(C)NO.1414 OF 2014 DATED 25.6.2014 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT.**
**67**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1479/2014**
## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS**
**EXHIBIT -P1**
**EXHIBIT -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 16.7.2008. EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN R.P.NO.1384 OF 2008 IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 23.1.2009. EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN LAR NO.34 OF 2010 AND CONNECTED CASES. EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN OP(C)NO.1414 OF 2014 DATED 25.6.2014 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT.**
**68**
## **LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1480/2014**
## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS**
**EXHIBIT -P1**
**EXHIBIT -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 16.7.2008. EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN R.P.NO.1384 OF 2008 IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 23.1.2009. EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN LAR NO.33 OF 2010 AND CONNECTED CASES. EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN OP(C)NO.1414 OF 2014 DATED 25.6.2014 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT.**
**69**
## **LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1496/2014**
## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS**
**EXHIBIT -P1**
**EXHIBIT -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 16.7.2008. EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN R.P.NO.1384 OF 2008 IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 23.1.2009. EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN LAR NO.25 OF 2010 AND CONNECTED CASES. EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN OP(C)NO.1414 OF 2014 DATED 25.6.2014 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT.**
**70**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1497/2014**
## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS**
**EXHIBIT -P1**
**EXHIBIT -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 16.7.2008. EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN R.P.NO.1384 OF 2008 IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 23.1.2009. EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN LAR NO.35 OF 2010 AND CONNECTED CASES. EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN OP(C)NO.1414 OF 2014 DATED 25.6.2014 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT.**
**71**
## **LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1498/2014**
## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS**
**EXHIBIT -P1**
**EXHIBIT -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 16.7.2008. EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN R.P.NO.1384 OF 2008 IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 23.1.2009. EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN LAR NO.28 OF 2010 AND CONNECTED CASES. EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN OP(C)NO.1414 OF 2014 DATED 25.6.2014 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT.**
**72**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1499/2014**
## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS**
**EXHIBIT -P1**
**EXHIBIT -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 16.7.2008. EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN R.P.NO.1384 OF 2008 IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 23.1.2009. EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN LAR NO.29 OF 2010 AND CONNECTED CASES. EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN OP(C)NO.1414 OF 2014 DATED 25.6.2014 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT.**
**73**
## **LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1500/2014**
## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS**
**EXHIBIT -P1**
**EXHIBIT -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 16.7.2008. EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN R.P.NO.1384 OF 2008 IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 23.1.2009. EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN LAR NO.27 OF 2010 AND CONNECTED CASES. EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN OP(C)NO.1414 OF 2014 DATED 25.6.2014 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT.**
**74**
## **LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1509/2014**
## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS**
**EXHIBIT -P1**
**EXHIBIT -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 16.7.2008. EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN R.P.NO.1384 OF 2008 IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 23.1.2009. EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN LAR NO.36 OF 2010 AND CONNECTED CASES. EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN OP(C)NO.1414 OF 2014 DATED 25.6.2014 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT.**
**75**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1510/2014**
## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS**
**EXHIBIT -P1**
**EXHIBIT -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 16.7.2008. EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN R.P.NO.1384 OF 2008 IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 23.1.2009. EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN LAR NO.30 OF 2010 AND CONNECTED CASES. EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN OP(C)NO.1414 OF 2014 DATED 25.6.2014 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT.**
**76**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1511/2014**
## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS**
**EXHIBIT -P1**
**EXHIBIT -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 16.7.2008. EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN R.P.NO.1384 OF 2008 IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 23.1.2009. EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN LAR NO.32 OF 2010 AND CONNECTED CASES. EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN OP(C)NO.1414 OF 2014 DATED 25.6.2014 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT.**
**77**
**LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1512/2014**
## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS**
**EXHIBIT -P1**
**EXHIBIT -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 16.7.2008. EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN R.P.NO.1384 OF 2008 IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 23.1.2009. EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN LAR NO.21 OF 2010 AND CONNECTED CASES. EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN OP(C)NO.1414 OF 2014 DATED 25.6.2014 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT.**
**78**
## **LAA. No.528/2014 and conn.**
## **APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1513/2014**
## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS**
**EXHIBIT -P1**
**EXHIBIT -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 16.7.2008. EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN R.P.NO.1384 OF 2008 IN O.P.NO.34264 OF 2000 DATED 23.1.2009. EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN LAR NO.31 OF 2010 AND CONNECTED CASES. EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN OP(C)NO.1414 OF 2014 DATED 25.6.2014 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT.**