STATE OF KERALA Vs. CHACKO EASSO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the Judgment of learned Subordinate Judge of Mavelikkara in L.A.R. No. 88 of 1978, which was a reference under S.20 of the Kerala Land Acquisition Act. Two points have been raised in this appeal, which pertains to the acquisition of 180 ares of land in Survey No. 262/2 (Re-survey No. 626/11, pursuant to a notification under S.3(1) of the Act, dated 3rd June 1975.

(2.) The first objection raised by the Advocate General, who appeared for the appellant State, is that inasmuch as admittedly the respondent not having made any claim in response to the notice under S.9(3) of the Act, he

(3.) The Advocate General submitted that even in cases where the delay in making the claim was excused, in the absence of a specific claim the Court would not be justified in awarding enhanced compensation. We think there is a little confusion regarding the position. By virtue of the provisions contained in sub-section (3) of S.2, what is being excused by the Court for reasons to be stated is not the delay in filing the Statement in response to S.9(3) notice, but the failure to make any claim. In that view, we do not think that there is any force in the contention advanced by the Advocate General that even where by virtue of S.27(3) of the Act, the Court excuses the failure to make a statement in response to S.9(3) of the Act, there should be a specific claim. This requirement, according to us, cannot be read into that section.