[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Radhika Kumari S vs State Of Kerala on 24 February, 2026
CM.Appl 1 of 25
in LA.APP. NO. 231 OF 2025 and
LA.APP. NO. 231 OF 2025
1
2026:KER:16573
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU
TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 5TH PHALGUNA, 1947
LA.APP. NO. 231 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 09.07.2007 IN LAR NO.171
OF 2003 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT/I ADDITIONAL SUB
COURT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
APPELLANTS:
1 RADHIKA KUMARI S
AGED 52 YEARS
W/O. LATE K.L. ANILKUMAR, KONATHUVEEDU,
VAYYAMOOLA, SHEEJA BHAVAN, TC 31/1616,
CHACKAI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 685024
2 KRISHNAPRASAD
AGED 21 YEARS
S/O. K.L. ANILKUMAR, LATE K.L. ANILKUMAR,
KONATHUVEEDU, VAYYAMOOLA, SHEEJA BHAVAN,
TC 31/1616, CHACKAI,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 685024
3 KRISHNAPRIYA
AGED 22 YEARS
D/O. K.L. ANILKUMAR, KONATHUVEEDU,
VAYYAMOOLA, SHEEJA BHAVAN, TC 31/1616,
CHACKAI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 685024
4 LEELAMMA K
AGED 86 YEARS
MOTHER OF LATE K.L. ANILKUMAR,
KONATHUVEEDU, VAYYAMOOLA,
SHEEJA BHAVAN, TC 31/1616, CHACKAI,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 685024
CM.Appl 1 of 25
in LA.APP. NO. 231 OF 2025 and
LA.APP. NO. 231 OF 2025
2
2026:KER:16573
BY ADV SHRI.JAYACHANDRAN NAIR G.
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
(THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LA INTERNATIONAL
AIRPORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM)
REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
CIVIL STATION, KUDAPPANAKKUNNU P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695043 (IN CHARGE OF
ERSTWHILE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ), PIN - 695001
3 L.K. SHYAMALATHA
AGED 66 YEARS, D/O. LATE KRISHNAN NAIR,
KONATHUVEEDU, VAYYAMOOLA, SHEEJA BHAVAN,
TC 31/1616, CHACKAI,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695024
4 L.K. SHEELA
D/O. LATE KRISHNAN NAIR, KONATHUVEEDU,
VAYYAMOOLA, SHEEJA BHAVAN, TC 31/1616,
CHACKAI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695024
5 K.L. SURESHKUMAR
S/O. LATE KRISHNAN NAIR, KONATHUVEEDU,
VAYYAMOOLA, SHEEJA BHAVAN, TC 31/1616,
CHACKAI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695024
SMT. REKHA C NAIR, SR.GP
THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 24.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CM.Appl 1 of 25
in LA.APP. NO. 231 OF 2025 and
LA.APP. NO. 231 OF 2025
3
2026:KER:16573
JUDGMENT
The appellants have filed C.M. Application No.2 of
2025 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the
delay of 6556 days in filing the land acquisition appeal. In the
affidavit filed in support of the application for condonation of
delay it has been stated as follows;
" The 1st Addl. Sub Court,
Thiruvananthapuram passed the said judgment in LAR
No. 171/2003 on 9.7.2007. After the coming of the said
judgment, my husband Anilkumar, the 4th claimant
therein, died on 11.1.2014. We were not aware of the
full details of the case and also not well versed in the
legal aspects of the same including the preferring of
appeal against the said judgment being the legal heirs
of Anilkumar. We have come to know about the filing of
LAA No. 1543/2009 by the 4th respondent, the passing
of judgment therein by this Hon'ble Court further
enhancing the land value @ Rs. 2 lakhs per Are and also
the filing of LAA No. 210/2021 by the 3 rd respondent
seeking such enhancement only on receiving notice in
LAA No. 210/2021 recently. Thereupon, we engaged a
CM.Appl 1 of 25
in LA.APP. NO. 231 OF 2025 and
LA.APP. NO. 231 OF 2025
2026:KER:16573
counsel at Ernakulam and filed vakalath in the said
LAA. "
2. The respondents have filed the counter affidavit
stating that sufficient cause has not been shown to condone
the delay.
3. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellants, the
learned Senior Government Pleader and the learned Counsel
for the 2nd respondent.
4. From the averments in the above extracted
paragraph, it is clear that the impugned judgment and decree
were passed on 09.07.2007, and the husband of the deponent
passed away much later on 11.01.2014. For nearly about 7
years, no steps were taken to file the appeal. Further, it is
candidly stated in the affidavit that the appellants later came
to know about the enhancement granted in another appeal
arising from the same acquisition and then only they engaged
CM.Appl 1 of 25
in LA.APP. NO. 231 OF 2025 and
LA.APP. NO. 231 OF 2025
2026:KER:16573
a counsel to file the appeal. It is evident that there was laches
and negligence on the part of the appellants in filing the
appeal. No satisfactory explanation is offered for the
inordinate delay. Unless sufficient cause is shown the delay
cannot be condoned in exercise of the powers under Section 5
of the Limitation Act. In this case, I find no sufficient cause to
exercise the power under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to
condone the huge delay of 6556 days. If the delay is condoned
without sufficient cause in such cases, the very purpose of law
related to limitation will be defeated.
Hence, the C.M. application is rejected, consequently
the Land Acquisition Appeal shall also stand rejected, as time
barred.
Sd/-
S.MANU
JUDGE
LU
CM.Appl 1 of 25
in LA.APP. NO. 231 OF 2025 and
LA.APP. NO. 231 OF 2025
2026:KER:16573
APPENDIX OF LA.APP. NO. 231 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES :
ANNEXURE-1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL HEIR
CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN FAVOR OF THE
APPELLANTS DATED 28.3.2014
ANNEXURE-2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
24.2.2024 PASSED BY THE 2ND ADDL. SUB
COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN LAR NO.
ANNEXURE-3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE
HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN CIVIL APPEAL
NO. 3547/2013 AND 13 CONNECTED CASES
ALONG WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9816/2011
DATED 9.5.2023
// True Copy // PA To Judge
