High Court Kerala High Court

State vs Mohammed on 30 January, 2008

Kerala High Court
State vs Mohammed on 30 January, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

CRP No. 1846 of 2001()



1. STATE
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. MOHAMMED
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.K.SURESH KUMAR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

 Dated :30/01/2008

 O R D E R
                          M.N.KRISHNAN, J.
                          --------------------------
                      C.R.P. NO. 1846 OF 2001
                            ---------------------
               Dated this the 30th day of January, 2008

                                 ORDER

This revision petition is preferred against the order of the Taluk

Land Board, Nilambur in SMP 3/97. By the said order, the Taluk

Land Board excluded 3.20 acres of land in R.S. No.567/1B1 of

Vellayur Village from the declarants account in the ceiling case. As

per the grounds stated in the revision memorandum, documents are

not produced and that the Taluk Land Board went wrong in deleting

that extent from R.S. No.579/1B1.

2. I have perused the order of the Taluk Land Board. The

Taluk Land Board had considered the matter elaborately. It can be

seen that the land was purchased by the claimant from one

Meenakshy Amma. The said Meenakshy Amma had purchased the

land by a registered document of 1952. Further, it is evident that the

said property was set apart to the share of Meenakshy Amma, as per

the partition decree in OS 496/53. Meenakshy Amma had purchased

the land from Neelangadan Kunhimohammed, the declarant as per

document No.2456 of 1952. So the right title and interest of

C.R.P. No. 1846/01 2

Neelangadan Kunhimohammed was lost in the year 1952 and by

subsequent transfer the property came into the hands of the

applicant. Therefore as on 1.1.70 that land could not have been

taken into consideration for fixing the ceiling limit of Neelangadan

Kunhimohammed. Therefore the said finding of the Taluk Land

Board is totally justified. So far as deletion is concerned, when total

extent of 3.20 acres is to be excluded from the ceiling limit

necessarily the area to be surrendered has to be reduced to that

extent. For that purpose, the property to be surrendered from other

survey numbers necessarily has to be excluded. I do not find any

illegality or irregularity in the order passed by the Taluk land Board.

This civil revision petition lacks merit and it is accordingly

dismissed.

M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE

vps

C.R.P. No. 1846/01 3

M.N.KRISHNAN, J.

————————-

CRP NO.1846/01

———————

ORDER

30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2008

C.R.P. No. 1846/01 4