IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID MONDAY, THE 7TH JANUARY 2008 / 17TH POUSHA 1929 CRP.No. 520 of 2003(C) ---------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 15/12/2000 IN IA.121/97 IN AA.162/1997 of A.A.(LAND REFORMS),TRIVANDRUM OA.39/1989 of LAND TRIBUNAL, TRIVANDRUM .................... REVN. PETITIONER: LEGAL HEIRS OF B.NAGAMMA (ORIGINAL RESPONDENT): ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. K.G.BHADRAN, SUBRAMANIA VILAS, T.C.44/263, AMBALATHARA, TRIVANDRUM. 2. N.REJITHAKUMARY, SUBRAMANIA VILAS, T.C.44/263, AMBALATHARA, TRIVANDRUM. 3. K.JAYARAM, SUBRAMANIA VILAS, T.C.44/263, AMBALATHARA, TRIVANDRUM. 4. K.HARILAL, SUBRAMANIA VILAS, T.C.44/263, AMBALATHARA, TRIVANDRUM. 5. K.JAYAKUMAR, SUBRAMANIA VILAS, T.C.44/263, AMBALATHARA, TRIVANDRUM. 6. N.JAYASREE, SUBRAMANIA VILAS, T.C.44/263, AMBALATHARA, TRIVANDRUM. 7. N.MALLIKA, SUBRAMANIA VILAS, T.C.44/263, AMBALATHARA, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADVS. SRI.L.MOHANAN SRI.D.SAJEEV RESPONDENTS: LEGAL HEIRS OF ORIGINAL APPLICANT LALITHAMA: --------------------------------------------------------- 1. RAVEENDRAN NAIR, KOLLANVILAKATHU VEEDU, AMBALATHARA, TRIVANDRUM. 2. MOHANAN NAIR, KOLLANVILAKATHU VEEDU, AMBALATHARA, TRIVANDRUM. 3. KRISHNAN NAIR, KOLLANVILAKATHU VEEDU, AMBALATHARA, TRIVANDRUM. 4. MADHUSOODHANAN NAIR, KOLLANVILAKATHU VEEDU, AMBALATHARA, TRIVANDRUM. 5. BALACHANDRAN NAIR, KOLLANVILAKATHU VEEDU, AMBALATHARA, TRIVANDRUM.(DIED) 6. SURENDRAN NAIR, KOLLANVILAKATHU VEEDU, AMBALATHARA, TRIVANDRUM. 7. SANGEETHA, KOLLANVILAKATHU VEEDU, AMBALATHARA, TRIVANDRUM. 8. APPELLATE AUTHORITY, TRIVANDRUM (LR), TRIVANDRUM. 9. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. ADDITIONAL RESPONDSENTS 10 TO 12 IMPLEADED ADDL.R10.S. SACHUKUMARY, W/O. BALACHANDRAN NAIR, VARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, KARINKADAMUKAL, THIRUVALLAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADDL.R11.ADARSA BALACHANDRAN, AGED 10, OF -DO- -DO- ADDL.R12.GREESHMA BALACHANDRAN, AGED 7, OF -DO- -DO- ADDL.R10 TO R12 IMPLEADED AS THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF DECEASED 5TH RESPONDENT AS PER ORDER DATED 13.6.2007 IN I.A. NO. 2675 OF 2005. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. LATHA THANKAPPAN-R8,R9. SRI.R.S.KALKURA-R5 THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ---------------------------------------------------------------- C.R.P. NO. 520 OF 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of January, 2008 O R D E R This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 15.12.2000 in I.A. No.121 of 1997 in A.A. No.162 of 1997 on the file of the Appellate Authority (L.R.), Thiruvananthapuram. The revision petitioners are the legal heirs of the original landlord Nagamma and the respondents are the legal heirs of the applicant, Lalithamma. The applicant Lalithamma filed an application before the Land Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram under Section 80 B of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 for purchase of kudikidappu in Survey No. 1170 of Muttathara village. The Land Tribunal considered the matter on merits and allowed the application holding that the applicant was entitled to get kudikidappu right over the property. Challenging the above order, the revision petitioners filed appeal before the Appellate Authority as A.A. No.60 of 1991. The case was renumbered as A.A. No.162 of 1997 and the appeal was transferred from the Appellate Authority, Attingal to the Appellate Authority, Alappuzha. According to the revision petitioners, after transfer C.R.P. NO.520/2003 2 of the appeal to the Appellate Authority, Alappuzha, the Appellate Authority failed to issue notice to the revision petitioners and, therefore, there was no occasion for them to appear before the Appellate Authority. It so happened that in the absence of the revision petitioners, the appeal was dismissed. On coming to know about the dismissal of the appeal, the revision petitioners filed I.A. No.121 of 1997 for restoration of the appeal to file. The revision petitioners submitted that they had explained that the delay in filing the restoration application was caused because the appeal was transferred to Alappuzha without giving notice to the parties when the Appellate Authority, Attingal had ceased functioning. The case was called before the Appellate Authority, Alappuzha and dismissed for non representation. The revision petitioners further submitted that they were under the bona fide impression that notice will be issued to them intimating the date of posting of the appeal. Learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners submitted that a good number of cases have met with the same fate and that those cases were subsequently restored to file on the application of the affected parties. 2. It is submitted on behalf of the revision petitioners that they have been contesting the matter seriously and that they have raised serious contentions in the appeal. They also submitted that a decision on merits C.R.P. NO.520/2003 3 in required in the interest of justice. Hence, they seek to set aside the order under challenge, to restore the appeal to file and to afford them an opportunity to argue the case on merits. 3. In the facts and circumstances considered and stated above, I am of the view that the appeal shall be considered on merits in the interest of justice. The order under challenge is, therefore, set aside and the Appellate Authority(L.R.), Thiruvananthapuram is directed to restore the appeal to file and hear the same on merits on condition that the revision petitioners pay an amount of Rs.2000/- as costs before the High Court Legal Services Committee within a period of three weeks from today. The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of as above. (HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) sp/ C.R.P. NO.520/2003 4 HAURN-UL-RASHID, J. C.R.P.NO520/2003 O R D E R 7TH JANUARY, 2008