Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Joy K.O Vs. the State of Kerala

Joy K.O vs The State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 21, 2014
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1133088

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Joy K.O

Respondent

The State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....crime has been registered and proceedings were being pursued before the appropriate forum. it is also stated that the petitioner is suffering from serious heart ailments as borne by ext.p4 certificate and is taking rest, as advised. it is in the meanwhile, that the petitioner has been served with ext.p5 notice under section 65 of the revenue recovery act, asking the petitioner to show cause; why 'warrant of arrest' shall not be issued. on receipt of the notice, the petitioner submitted a detailed explanation as borne by ext.p6, also seeking time for producing the relevant documents.3. the petitioner is constrained to approach this court w.p.c.no. 2 because of the steps being taken by the 2nd respondent, without considering or passing any orders on ext.p6.4. heard the learned government pleader as well.5. considering the facts and circumstances as stated above, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to consider ext.p6 explanation submitted by the petitioner in response to ext.p5 and pass appropriate orders, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the authorised representative. this shall be done at the earliest, at any rate within 'two months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. the petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition, before the 2nd respondent, for further steps. p.r. ramachandra menon, judge sp

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE21T DAY OF FEBRUARY20142ND PHALGUNA, 1935 WP(C).NO. 5291 OF2014(J) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JOY K.O, AGED64YEARS S/O.KOMBAN OUSPEH, WEST FORT, POOTHOLE THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR - 680 001.

3. THE TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, THRISSUR TALUK OFFICE THRISSUR - 680 001.

4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, TAMIL NADU CENTRAL SALES TAX, THIRUNELVELI TAMIL NADU - 600 001. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER V.K. RAFEEQ THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON2102-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: NS WP(C).NO. 5291 OF2014(J) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS : ------------------------ EXT.P1: COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE SERVED ON THE PETITIONER DATED NIL. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE LIST OF MOVABLES AUCTIONED DATED NIL. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER DATED1712/07. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE AMALA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, DATED32/2014. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED AND SERVED ON THE PETITIONER DATED281/2014. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE OBJECTION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED192/2014 OFFICE COPY RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL ------------------------ / TRUE COPY / NS P.A. TO JUDGE P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

--------------------------------------- W.P.C. No.5291 OF2014--------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of February, 2014. JUDGMENT

The petitioner was running a Beedi manufacturing unit at Thirunelveli, in the State of Tamilnadu, which was being run under the name and style as 'Karthika Beedi Company'.

2. It is stated that, the business establishment had to be closed down, because of various adverse circumstances and the atrocious actions taken by somebody, against whom a Crime has been registered and proceedings were being pursued before the appropriate forum. It is also stated that the petitioner is suffering from serious heart ailments as borne by Ext.P4 Certificate and is taking rest, as advised. It is in the meanwhile, that the petitioner has been served with Ext.P5 notice under Section 65 of the Revenue Recovery Act, asking the petitioner to show cause; why 'warrant of arrest' shall not be issued. On receipt of the notice, the petitioner submitted a detailed explanation as borne by Ext.P6, also seeking time for producing the relevant documents.

3. The petitioner is constrained to approach this Court W.P.C.No. 2 because of the steps being taken by the 2nd respondent, without considering or passing any orders on Ext.P6.

4. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances as stated above, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P6 explanation submitted by the petitioner in response to Ext.P5 and pass appropriate orders, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the authorised representative. This shall be done at the earliest, at any rate within 'two months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition, before the 2nd respondent, for further steps. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE sp

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial