Sreeja Babu vs M.K. Abraham
2023 Latest Caselaw 1168 Ker

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 1168 Ker
Judgement Date : 18 January, 2023

Kerala High Court

Sreeja Babu vs M.K. Abraham on 18 January, 2023

W.A. No. 893/2015                  :1:




                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                 PRESENT

            THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR

                                    &

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

     WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 28TH POUSHA, 1944

                            WA NO. 893 OF 2015

JUDGMENT DATED 10.04.2015 IN WPC 24659/2014 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

APPELLANT/THIRD RESPONDENT:

              SREEJA BABU
              AGED 38 YEARS
              W/O.BABU SHANKER, RESIDING AT POTTAMEL KIZHAKETHIL
              HOUSE, THONNAKKADU P.O., CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,
              PIN 689 121.
              BY ADV SMT.SREEJA BABU (APPELLANT) (B/O)


RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1, 2, 4 & 5:

     1        M.K. ABRAHAM
              AGED 59 YEARS
              S/O. KURIAN, KARATTUMANNIL BUILDINGS, WEST OTHERA P.O.,
              THIRUVALLA TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.
     2        GENERAL MANAGER
              DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, ALAPPUZHA, PIN 689 001.
     3        THE SECRETARY
              INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 001.
     4        THE DIRECTOR,
              INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 001.
     5        STATE OF KERALA
              REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 001.
              BY ADVS.
              SMT.A.SINDHULAKSHMI
              SRI.R.HARIKRISHNAN
              SRI.E.RAMACHANDRAN
              SRI.R.UMASANKAR



         THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18.01.2023, THE

     COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.A. No. 893/2015                      :2:



               S. MANIKUMAR, CJ & SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
             ---------------------------------------------------------
                             W.A. No. 893 of 2015
                 ---------------------------------------------------------
                        Dated this the 18rd day of January, 2023.

                                    JUDGMENT

S. MANIKUMAR,CJ.

Before the writ court, respondent No.1/writ petitioner has

sought for the following reliefs:

1) Issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Exhibit P11 and all further proceedings pursuant thereto;

2) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to dispose of Exhibit P10 expeditiously.

3) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to re-assign the property of this petitioner.

2. Respondent No.1/writ petitioner, an allottee of the land in

the development plot Mundankavu, Chengannoor, has approached

the writ court being aggrieved by Exhibit P11 order dated

11.09.2014 issued by the second respondent resuming the building

and land owned by him to the appellant.

3. After considering the rival submissions, writ court, vide

judgment dated 10.04.2015 in W.P.(C) No. 24659 of 2014, ordered

thus:

...Thus, the writ petition is disposed of with the following

directions:

i. The first respondent is directed to put the petitioner in

occupation of the building along with machineries within a

period of 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.

ii. The petitioner can challenge the order of resumption

before the Government of Kerala and if the petitioner moves

the Government within a week from the date of receipt of the

judgment, the Government shall consider the petitioner's

request after hearing petitioner and the third respondent

within one month from the date of receipt of the request.

iii. The first respondent is at liberty to proceed against the

petitioner based on Exhibit P11 order, for eviction, in

accordance with the procedure as contemplated under the Land

Conservancy Act, however, the same would depend upon the

outcome of the decision of the Government. No costs."

Being aggrieved, instant appeal is filed.

4. On 05.12.2022, when the matter came up for hearing, the

learned counsel for the appellant sought time to get instructions

from the appellant. Thereafter, on 20.12.2022, the learned counsel

again sought adjournment of the matter to ascertain the correct

address of the appellant and also to inform the posting of the

matter. The said order reads thus:

"Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though he sent a registered letter to the appellant to find out whether the grievance is existing or not, same has been returned with the endorsement 'addressee left'. Therefore, he seeks two weeks time to ascertain the correct address and inform the posting of the writ appeal.

2. However, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the land originally allotted to the appellant has already been resumed. It is also submitted that the appellant has refused to take the alternate land given to her.