Kerala High Court
Kambitta Valappil Saleem vs The Special Tahsildar (L.A) on 13 September, 2021
OP(C) No.1205/2021 1/4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
Monday, the 13th day of September 2021 / 22nd Bhadra, 1943
OP(C) NO. 1205 OF 2021
LAR 101/2010 OF PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE.
PETITIONER:
KAMBITTA VALAPPIL SALEEM, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O. MAMMAD KOYA, K.V.HOUSE,
POKKUNHALI PARAMBA, OLAVANA (P.O.), PANTHEERANKAVU, KOZHIKODE
TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673025.
RESPONDENTS:
1. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (L.A), KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673 305.
2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KINFRA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001.
OP (Civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed
along with the OP(C) the High Court be pleased to pass an interim order, directing the
1st respondent to deposit 50% of the remaining amount of compensation due to the
petitioner in terms of Exhibit P2 judgment, pending final disposal of the Original
Peition (Civil).
This petition again coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the
affidavit filed in support of OP(C) and this court's order dated 27/07/2021 and upon
hearing the arguments of M/S R.BINDU SASTHAMANGALAM & PRASANTH M.P,
Advocates for the petitioner and of GOVERNMENT PLEADER, for respondents 1 & 3 and
Sri. P.U.SHAILAJAN, Advocate for the respondent 2, the court passed the following:
[PTO]
OP(C) No.1205/2021 2/4
V.G.ARUN, J.
============================
O.P(C)Nos.1205, 1231 & 1232 OF 2021
============================
Dated this the 13th day of September, 2021
ORDER
As directed by this Court, affidavit has been filed on
behalf of the requisitioning authority, pointing out that the
compromise decree, based on which the claim for
compensation is raised, is vitiated by fraud and collusion. It is
alleged that the compromise was arrived at the instance of a
Senior Government Pleader whose wife was appearing for
some of the claimants and therefore the compromise is
vitiated by fraud. Therefore, the requisitioning authority
submitted petitions for setting aside the compromise decree,
of which some petitions have been dismissed. The Special
Leave Petitions challenging those orders are pending before
the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The further submission is that in
instant cases, petition to set aside the compromise decree are
pending.
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in the
OP(C) No.1205/2021 3/4
instant cases the wife of the Government Pleader, against
whom allegation is raised, was not the Counsel and therefore
the allegation of fraud is not attracted. It is also pointed out
that in some of the cases, the Government has disbursed the
compensation amount without demur. The said averment, if
true is serious. All claimants having lost their property under
the same acquisition, the Government cannot pick and choose
persons to whom compensation is awarded. Such action
amounts to discrimination.
3. Learned Counsel for the second respondent may bring
this aspect to the notice of the appropriate authority. The
question as to whether a portion of the compensation could
be directed to be disbursed will be considered thereafter.
Post after two weeks.
Sd/-
V.G.ARUN
JUDGE
NB/13-9
13-09-2021 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
OP(C) No.1205/2021 4/4
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT
IN L.A.A.NO.97/2015 DATED 7.9.2018 ALONG WITH THE
MEDIATION AGREEMENT.
