State of Kerala vs Maruthachalam Advocate - Sonnet Paul — 100070/2022
Case under Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act Section sec64. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED on 30th March 2026.
LAR - LAND ACQUISITION REFERENCE
CNR: KLPK010017032022
Filing Number
100607/2022
Filing Date
06-04-2022
Registration No
100070/2022
Registration Date
17-05-2022
Court
District And Sessions Court / Rent Control Appellate Authority, Palakkad
Judge
3-IInd Addl.District & Sessions Court , Palakkad
Decision Date
30th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Kerala
Adv. Manoj Kumar K M
KINFRA, Spl Tahsildar LA KBIC, Kanjikkode, Palakkad
Adv. Gopalakrishnan.P.P
Santhosh Koshy Thomas
Respondent(s)
Maruthachalam Advocate - Sonnet Paul
Hearing History
Judge: 3-IInd Addl.District & Sessions Court , Palakkad
Disposed
Order/ Judgement
For Hearing.
For production of documents
For production of documents
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 30-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 27-03-2026 | Order/ Judgement |
| 25-03-2026 | For Hearing. |
| 18-03-2026 | For production of documents |
| 16-03-2026 | For production of documents |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Land Acquisition Authority, Palakkad rejected Maruthachalam's petition for enhanced compensation for 0.9260 hectares of wetland acquired for KINFRA industrial development. The court found the original award of ₹93,36,765 adequate, noting proper consideration of relevant factors. The claimant's failure to provide evidence despite multiple opportunities rendered adjudication impossible, resulting in the reference being answered against him. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Land Acquisition Authority, Palakkad rejected Maruthachalam's petition for enhanced compensation for 0.9260 hectares of wetland acquired for KINFRA industrial development. The court found the original award of ₹93,36,765 adequate, noting proper consideration of relevant factors. The claimant's failure to provide evidence despite multiple opportunities rendered adjudication impossible, resulting in the reference being answered against him. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
More from this court
District And Sessions Court / Rent Control Appellate Authority, Palakkad All courts →Explore other courts