IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
CRP No. 601 of 2005()
1. K.A.KUNHIMON, S/O.KOMPATHAYIL AMMU.
... Petitioner
2. K.M.SHAMSUDHEEN, S/O.KOMPATHAYIL
3. HAMZA, S/O.KOMPATHAYI MOHAMMED KUTTY.
4. M.LAILA, W/O.KOMPATHAYIL ABOOBACKER.
5. MOHAMMED SHAHEEN, S/O.KOMPATHAYIL
6. SHABNA, D/O.KOMPATHAYIL ABOOBACKER,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRSSENTED BY CHIEF
... Respondent
2. THE TALUK LAND BOARD, OTTAPPALAM,
3. V.P.KANNAN NAIR, S/O.ACHUTHANNAIR,
4. AHAMED KMAL, S/O.KOMPATHAYIL ABOOBACKER
For Petitioner :SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :17/01/2008
O R D E R
K.T. SANKARAN, J.
-------------------------------
C.R.P. No. 601 OF 2005
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 17th day of January, 2008
O R D E R
The revision petitioners filed claim petitions under Section 85 (8)
of the Kerala Land Reforms Act in SM No.1 of 1997 on the file of the
Taluk Land Board, Ottappalam. The Taluk Land Board rejected the
claim petitions. The claimants are challenging in this revision, the order
dt.28.02.05 passed by the Taluk Land Board.
2. As per the order dt.31.03.01, the Taluk Land Board held that
the assessee, namely, Sri.V.P.Kannan Nair was holding excess lands.
The assessee was directed to surrender an extend of 4.84 acres. The
revision petitioners, the claimants, are claiming under registered
documents executed by the assessee in the year 1986. Another
objection raised by the claimants was in respect of 4.50 acres of land
covered by document No.787/80 executed by Smt. Elzy Elizabeth and
Prabhu(minor). The transferors got rights as per document No.773/80
executed by Smt.Parukutty Amma. It is stated that as on 01.01.70
Smt.Parukutty Amma was in possession of the land.
3. The Taluk Land Board rejected the contentions raised by the
claimants on the ground that the transfers are hit by Section 84 of the
Kerala Land Reforms Act and they are intended to defeat the ceiling
CRP No.601 of 2005
2
provisions. As regards the claim in respect of the land covered by
document No.787 of 1980, the Taluk Land Board held that an extent of
6.37 acres was purchased by the assessee, Kannan Nair, as per
document No.431/69, out of the total extend of 7.77 acres and therefore
the remaining extent available would be only 1.40 acres.
4. After the order passed by the Taluk Land Board, the Kerala
Land Reforms Act was amended by the amendment Act of 2005(Act 21
of 2006). By the amended Act, Section 7(E) and Sub Section 4 of
Section 84 were inserted.
Section 7E reads as follows:
“”7 E. Certain persons who acquired lands to be deemed
tenants:– Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained
in section 74 or section 84 or in any other provisions of this Act,
or in any other law for the time being in force or in any contract,
custom or usage, or in any judgment, decree or order of any
court, tribunal or other authority, a person who at the
commencement of the Kerala Land Reforms (Amendment) Act,
2005, is in possession of any land, not exceeding four hectares
in extent, acquired by him or his predecessor-in-interest by way
of purchase or otherwise on payment of consideration from any
person holding land in excess of the ceiling area; during the
period between the date of the commencement of the Kerala
Land Reforms Act, 1963 (1 of 1964), and the date of
commencement of the Kerala Land Reforms (Amendment) Act,
2005, shall be deemed to be a tenant.”
In Section 84, sub-section (4) was also inserted, which reads as follows:
“(4) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections
CRP No.601 of 2005
3
(1), (1 A) or (2), or in any judgment, decree, or order of any
court, tribunal or other authority, no acquisition of land referred
to in section 7E shall be deemed to be invalid, or ever to have
been invalid by reason only of the fact that the land so acquired
was found included as, or forming part of, the land liable to be
surrendered by the transferor as excess land under the
provisions of this Act and no suit or other proceedings including
proceedings for eviction relating to the said land shall be
instituted, maintained or continued in any court or tribunal
against any person who is a deemed tenant under section 7E
and every such suit or proceedings pending shall stand abated;
Provided that, no ceiling cases wherein excess land has
been physically taken over and distributed to landless labourers
or reserved for public purposes as provided in this Act shall be
reopened.
Provided further that if the Taluk Land Board is satisfied
that the transfer of land made by a person, in possession of
excess land is calculated to defeat the ceiling provisions, it may
take into account the land so transferred in determining his
ceiling area and may direct him to surrender such extent of land
held or possessed by him.
Provided also that no ceiling cases or proceedings in
which any land has already been surrendered by, or assumed
from, a person as excess land before the commencement of the
Kerala Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 2005, shall be
reopened.”
5. In view of the amendment Act 21 of 2006, the matter requires
reconsideration by the Taluk Land Board. An opportunity to put forward
necessary contentions on the basis of the amendment Act shall be
provided to the revision petitioners. The Taluk Land Board shall dispose
of the matter afresh taking into account the amendment Act 21 of 2006
as well.
CRP No.601 of 2005
4
For the aforesaid reasons, the order dt.28.02.05 passed by the
Taluk Land Board is set aside and the case is remanded for fresh
disposal in the light of the observations made above. The Taluk Land
Board shall dispose of the case expeditiously.
K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE
btt
CRP No.601 of 2005
5