Kerala High Court
Velluva Chathoth Janaki Amma vs Smt.K.E.Devaki Amma on 15 October, 2014
Author: V.Chitambaresh
Bench: V.Chitambaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH
WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2014/23RD ASWINA, 1936
CRP(LR).No. 768 of 2013
-------------------------------------
TLB 303/1973 of TALUK LAND BOARD, THALASSERY
..................................................
REVISION PETITIONERS/CLAIMANTS:-:
--------------------------------------------------------------
1. VELLUVA CHATHOTH JANAKI AMMA,
D/O.NARAYANAN NAMBIAR, CHAVASSERY AMSOM
VELIYAMBRA DESOM, P.R.NAGAR P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT.
2. SMT.KAPPADAN VILASINI,
D/O.ANANTHAN NAMBIAR, CHAVASSERY AMSOM
VELIYAMBRA DESOM, P.R.NAGAR P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.CIBI THOMAS
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:-
-------------------------------------------------
1. SMT.K.E.DEVAKI AMMA,
"SREE NILAYAM", KEEZHUR AMSOM, KEEZHUR P.O
IRITTY, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 703.
2. THE CHAIRMAN,
TALUK LAND BOARD, THALASSERY - 679 532.
3. THE TAHSILDAR,
THALASSERY - 679 532.
4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
KANNUR - 670 101.
5. THE SECRETARY,
LAND BOARD, TRIVANDRUM - 695 001.
6. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
BY SPL. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SUSHEELA R BHAT.
THIS CRP (LAND REFORMS ACT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 15-10-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
DCS
V.CHITAMBARESH,J.
-------------------------------
C.R.P.(L.R.) No. 768 of 2013
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 15th day of October, 2014
O R D E R
There has not been a proper consideration of the claim made by the petitioners under Section 7E of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (the 'Act' for short). The grant of a certificate of title under Section 106B of the Act by the Land Tribunal is not a sine qua non to claim the benefit of deemed tenancy under Section 7E of the Act. The pre-requisites for claiming the benefit of Section 7E of the Act has been detailed in Rajeev v. District Collector [2014 (4) KLT 209].
2. It however remains to be seen as to whether the transfer is intended to defeat the ceiling provisions or that the land has already been assumed possession of as excess land as per the proviso to Section 84(4) of the Act. The revision petitioners claim to be transferees in possession in respect of 75 cents of land in R.S. No. 121 from the declarant under document No. 725/1993 of SRO, Uliyil. The claim has not been properly considered as directed in the earlier order of remand in C.R.P. No. 860/2008.
C.R.P.(L.R.) No. 768 of 2013 2
3. I set aside the impugned order and direct the Taluk Land Board, Thalassery to re-consider the claim of the petitioners after affording to the interested parties an opportunity of being heard. Final orders shall be passed by the Taluk Land Board, Thalassery within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No costs.
V.CHITAMBARESH JUDGE DCS