IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 5TH JUNE 2008 / 15TH JYAISHTA 1930 CRP.No. 761 of 2005() --------------------- AA.2/2000 of A.A.(LR), KANNUR I.A. No. 6/1993 IN OA.11/1986 of LAND TRIBUNAL, KANHANGAD .................... REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT/APPLICANT. -------------------------------------- M.P.SEETHARA HEDGE, S/O.PARAMESWARA HEGDE, NEAR VISWA HINDU PARISHATH, P.O.PUTHUR, SOUTH KANARA, KARNATAKA STATE. BY ADV. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR RESPONDENTS: JOINT APPLICANTS. -------------------------------------- 1. KARATTU KUMARAN, S/O.KORAN KARET, HOSDURG VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, P.O.KANHANGAD. 2. SULOCHANA, W/O.LATE H.M.PADMANABHA, R/A. THOYAMMEL, NEAR VISHNUMOORTHI TEMPLE, HOSDURG VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, P.O.KANHANGAD. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS FOR R1 GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R3 SRI.SHYSON P. MANGUZHA THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------------------------ C.R.P No. 761 of 2005 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of June 2008 ORDER The petitioner in I.A. 6/1993 in O.A. 11/1986 on the file of the Land Tribunal Kanhangad is the revision petitioner. O.A. 11/1986 was a joint application filed by respondents 1 and 2 under Section 72 MM of the Kerala Land Reforms Act for assignment of jenm right for an extent of 96 Cents of land in R.S. No. 254/1 and 58 Cents of land in R.S. 254/3 of Hosdurg Village in favour of the 1st respondent. The said application was allowed by the Land Tribunal on 8.10.1986. The petitioner in I.A. 6/1993 is not a party to the said O.A. Proceedings. According to the revision petitioner the property assigned in favour of 1st respondoent belonged to the revision petitioner. The 2nd respondent has no manner of right over the property. In fact O.A No. 11/1986 was clandestinely filed by Respondents 1 and 2 . The revision petitioner also submitted that the 1st respondent is not a cultivating tenant and the 2nd respondent is not the Jenmi of the property. When the revision petitioner came to know about the order of the Land Tribunal in O.A. 11/1986, filed I.A. 6/1993 under Section 72 MM(7) of the Land Reforms Act to set aside the order passed in the Original Application. The application was filed on 16.1.1993. According to the revision petitioner , the said application is supported by a petition to condone the delay. The Land Tribunal by the impugned order dated 15.7.1999 held that the application under Section 72 MM(7) of the C.R.P No. 761 of 2005 -2- Kerala Land Reforms Act is not accompanied by an application to condone the delay. Consequently I.A. 6/1993 was dismissed The Appellate Authority also considered the same question and confirmed the order of the Land Tribunal on the ground of limitation. The Appellate Authority also held that there is no proper application to condone the delay of six years is seen filed before the Land tribunal, so also no satisfactory reason is pointed out for the delay before the Land Tribunal. Therefore the appeal was dismissed without deciding the case of the revision petitioner on merits. 2. The revision petitioner contended before me that he has filed proper application for condonation of delay in the lower appellate court. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case I direct the Appellate Authority to consider afresh, A.A. 2/2000 and see whether there is sufficient reason for condoning delay in filing the petition under 72 MM (7) of the Land Reforms Act. If it has not been filed in the proper form and sufficient reasons are not stated, the Appellate Authority shall give an opportunity to the revision petitioner to file a proper application to condone the delay . The Appellate Authority shall also consider the delay condonation petition and the appeal and pass orders as expeditiously as possible at any rate within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. This C.R.P is disposed of as above. There will be no order as to costs HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE es