IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
CRP No. 912 of 2004(G)
1. P.K.MUHAMMED ALI, S/O. HAMZA,
... Petitioner
2. P.K.FAROOK, S/O. HAMZA,
Vs
1. TALUK LAND BOARD, OTTAPPALAM,
... Respondent
2. TAHSILDAR, OTTAPPALAM.
3. VILLAGE OFFICER,
4. JACOB, S/O. PAULOSE,
5. STATE OF KERALA,
For Petitioner :SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :13/02/2008
O R D E R
K.T. SANKARAN, J.
...................................................................................
C.R.P. No. 912 OF 2004
...................................................................................
Dated this the 13th February, 2008
O R D E R
The petitioners filed claim petitions under section 85(8) of the Kerala Land
Reforms Act in S.M. No. 323 of 1977 before the Taluk Land Board, Ottappalam. The
Taluk Land Board rejected the claim petitions. The petitioners challenge the order
passed by the Taluk Land Board to that extent.
2. In the S.M. proceedings, Poulose, the predecessor in interest of the fourth
respondent was the assessee. By the final order, the assessee was directed to
surrender an extent of 10 acres 31.50 cents . The claim petitioners claimed title to the
property included in their applications under various documents executed by the
assignees of the fourth respondent as well as by the fourth respondent. All those
assignments were made after 01.01.1970.
3. The Kerala Land Reforms Act was amended by the Kerala Land Reforms
(Amendment) Act 2005 (Act 21 of 2006). By the amendment, Section 7E and Section
84(4) were inserted.
Section 7E reads as follows:
“”7E. 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
C.R.P. No. 912 OF 2004
2
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 (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
C.R.P. No. 912 OF 2004
3
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.”
4. In view of the Amendment Act, the claim petitions filed by the petitioners are
liable to be considered afresh. The Taluk Land Board shall render a finding as to
whether the petitioners are entitled to the reliefs as per the amended provisions, after
affording them an opportunity of being heard.
The order passed by the Taluk Land Board to the extent it relates to the claims
made by the petitioners is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Taluk Land
Board for fresh disposal , in accordance with law and in the manner indicated above.
K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.
lk