IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 7TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 16TH BHADRA 1932 RP.No. 371 of 2009() -------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRP.831/1993 Dated 25/03/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/ADDITIONAL PETITIONERS -------------------------------- 1. MUHAMMED @ KUNHAPPA, S/O.MOHAMMED @ BAPPU, PARAYIPURAM AMSOM, ANGADIPURAM VILLAGE. 2. KUNHI MOIDEEN, S/O.MUHAMMED @ BAPPU, PARAYIPURAM AMSOM, ANGADIPURAM VILLAGE. 3. UMMER, S/O.MUHAMMED @ BAPPU, PARAYIPURAM AMSOM, ANGADIPURAM VILLAGE. 4. ABDUL SALAM, S/O.MUHAMMED @ BAPPU, PARAYIPURAM AMSOM, ANGADIPURAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.KURUP SRI.C.R.SYAMKUMAR SRI.K.J.ABRAHAM SRI.LAVARAJ M.G. SRI.JOSE KURIAN SRI.C.R.VINOD KUMAR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. CHAKKIDIYIL THAZHATHETHIL KAMALAM ALIAS KAMALA BAI, D/O.PUNHILAKSHMI NANGA, ANGADIPURAM. 2. CHAKKIDIYIL THAZHATHETHIL INDIRA, D/O.KUNHILAKSHMI AMMA, ANGADIPURAM. 3. CHAKKIDIYIL THAZHATHETHIL KUNHIMALU NANGA, ANGADIPURAM. 4. CHAKKIDIYIL THAZHATHETHIL RAJENDRAN, S/O.KUNHILAKSHMI NANGA, ANGADIPURAM. -2- R.P.NO.371/2009 5. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) FOR R1 to R4 SMT.PREETHY KARUNAKARAN FOR R1 to R-4 GOVT.PLEADER SRI P.K. RAVIKRISHNAN FOR R5. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON I.A.NO.897/2009 IN R.P.NO.371/2009 ------------- Dismissed 7/9/2010 Sd/- Harun-Ul-Rashid, Judge. True Copy HARUN-UL-RASHID,J. ------------------------------ R.P.NO.371 OF 2009 IN C.R.P.NO.831 OF 1993 ------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2010 O R D E R Review petitioners are the additional petitioners in the CRP. This Court by order dated 25th March, 2009 dismissed C.R.P.No.831/1993. This Review Petition is filed seeking to review of the order dismissing the CRP. The grievance of the review petitioners is that the most important grounds urged in the CRP, namely, Grounds D, E, K and L were not considered and no decision has been taken in respect of the said grounds. The review petitioners submitted that in the proceedings culminated in the disposal of the CRP the petitioners sought the benefit under the newly introduced provisions, namely, Sections 72EE and 72F. According to the petitioners, the newly introduced provisions adopted special procedures in the matter of assignment of the property in favour of a cultivating tenant. According to them, Rules 7A to 7G of the Kerala Land Reforms (Vesting and Assignment) Rules, 1970 were also introduced by subsequent notification. It is also submitted that when the matter was considered by the Tribunal as well as the Appellate Authority the aforesaid rules though were in force at that time, were not considered and therefore the non-compliance of the statutory provisions vitiates the orders under challenge. It is submitted that this Court also did not go into the benefits conferred under the said provisions and therefore manifest injustice has been caused to the petitioners. For these reasons the petitioners seek to review of the order in the CRP. It is a fact that these questions referred above were not considered by this Court in the order under review. As submitted by the counsel for the petitioners, the matter requires further hearing. Therefore, the review petition stands allowed. The order under review is recalled. Post the CRP for hearing after two weeks. HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE. kcv.