KERALA GOOSEBERRY HILLS AYURVEDA HEALTH, RESORT PRIVATE LIMITED vs STATE OF KERALA

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 19609

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. JAYACHANDRAN, J
KERALA GOOSEBERRY HILLS AYURVEDA HEALTH, RESORT PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 45034 OF 2025

Important Points

The court ensures prompt consideration of applications for exemption under the Kerala Land Reforms Act, emphasizing the importance of hearing affected parties.

Subject

Civil - Writ Petition

Act Referred

Kerala Land Reforms Act: S.81

Headnote

Under Section 81(3) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, the petitioners sought exemption for 3 acres of plantation property. The court directed the 2nd respondent to consider the application swiftly, ensuring all affected parties are heard (paragraphs 1-2). The court's determination emphasized the need for prompt compliance to protect petitioners' rights (paragraph 1). The final ruling allows the writ petition as outlined (final conclusion).

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.ALIAS M.CHERIAN, SHRI.K.M.RAPHY, SHRI.BRISTO S PARIYARAM, SMT.MINNU DARWIN, SMT.RESHMA RAJESH, SHRI.SAVIO AUGUSTINE
For the Respondents: SRI.AJITH VISWANATHAN

Table of Content
1. petitioners sought exemption under the kerala land reforms act. (Para 1)
2. the court directed consideration of the application ensuring all affected parties are heard. (Para 2)

JUDGMENT

Ext.P1 is a petition preferred by the petitioners seeking exemption under Section 81 (3) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act . It is the petitioner's contention that the subject property having an extent of 3 acres is part of the plantation and hence liable to be exempted under (3). Petitioners seek Ext.P1 to be considered by the 2^nd respondent, in accordance with law, expeditiously.

2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader, this Court directs the 2^nd respondent to consider Ext.P1 application, in accordance with law, expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner will produce a copy of the judgment before the 2^nd respondent, for compliance. Needless to say that, petitioner, as also, any other affected person, will be afforded with an opportunity of being heard before taking a call in Ext.P1.

This Writ Petition will stand allowed, as indicated above.

Sd/-