High CourtsSingle Bench

Annamma Thomas vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 13 March 2024 · Citation: (2024) 03 KL CK 0096

HON’BLE JUDGES
A. Badharudeen, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Review Petition No. 344 Of 2024 In Regular Second Appeal No.394 Of 2023
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 672 words

A. Badharudeen, J

1.

This review petition is at the instance of the appellant in R.S.A.No.394/2023, who is the plaintiff in O.S.No.244/2017 on the files of the Additional Munsiff Court, Kottayam and in A.S.No.155/2019 on the files of the Additional District Court – I, Kottayam.

2.

As per judgment, dated 21.11.2023, this Court dismissed the second appeal, after addressing the grievance addressed, including substantial questions of law. This Court found against the plea of adverse possession raised by the review petitioner, while confirming the said finding entered into by the trial court as well as the appellate court. Thereafter, this Court directed the 3rd defendant to expedite the proceedings to get vacant possession of the Government land without fail, at any rate, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

3.

Now, this review petition has been filed to expunge the direction issued by this Court to expedite the proceedings to get vacant possession of the Government land.

4.

According to the learned counsel for the review petitioner, now, the review petitioner filed an application for getting assignment of 0.932 cent of land found to be unauthorisedly occupied by the review petitioner, before the Revenue Divisional Officer.

5.

The learned Government Pleader strongly opposed review of the judgment. It is submitted that, the review petitioner challenged the judgment in R.S.A.No.394/2023 before the Hon’ble Apex Court and the S.L.P. was dismissed. It is also submitted by the learned Government Pleader, on instructions from the officials that 0.932 cent of property, found to be unauthorisedly occupied by the review petitioner ordered to be recovered by this Court by giving specific direction to the 3rd defendant, is part of public road and as early on 17.3.2017, Ext.A3 notice was issued to get the same vacated. Thereafter, the review petitioner filed writ petition and at the verge of dispossession, she filed the present petition and claimed adverse possession. The learned Government Pleader also submitted, on instructions, that the Government has no intention to assign 0.932 cent of land to the review petitioner, since the same is part of public road.

6.

It is discernible from the review petition that S.L.P. (Civil) No.3926/2024, filed by the review petitioner before the Hon’ble Apex Court, was dismissed on 20.2.2024 and it was thereafter, the present review petition was filed. It is also noticed that the review petitioner also filed W.P.(C).No.8241/2024 for the said relief and the same also was dismissed by this Court. Apart from W.P.(C).No.8241/2024, the review petitioner filed two other writ petitions, viz., W.P.(C).No.44317/2023andW.P.(C).No.5799/2024.W.P.(C).No.5799/2024  was  dismissed  as  withdrawn  and   W.P.(C).No.44317/2023 was disposed of, granting one month time and the said period already expired.

7.

On perusing the order of the Hon’ble Apex Court in S.L.P.(Civil) No.3926/2024, the same was dismissed as under:

“We are not inclined to interfere with the judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the High Court. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed.”

8.

Overall evaluation of the materials, it is discernible that the review petitioner, who encroached upon the Government property, acquired for the purpose of road, has been stalling vacant possession of the same by the Government, by filing litigations one after another. Since it is categorically submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the Government has no intention to assign 0.932 cent of property, found to be unauthorisedly occupied by the review petitioner, there is no reason to interfere with the direction issued by this Court, after referring the judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court to get back Government land, encroached upon by the review petitioner.

9.

Therefore,  this  review  petition  is  found  to  be meritless and the same is dismissed with cost of the State Government to be realised from the review petitioner.

10.

The 3rd respondent is directed to complete the process of vacant possession of 0.932 cent of property, within a period of seven days and file compliance report on 21.3.2024.

The learned Government Pleader is directed to communicate this order to the 3rd respondent, forthwith, for compliance and filing report.