IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 3RD JANUARY 2011 / 13TH POUSHA 1932 CRP.No. 2778 of 2000(H) ----------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23/07/1999 IN PRR IN L6.SM.1/1991 of TALUK LAND BOARD, PARUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): --------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. M.L.SAJEEVAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. * MEENAKSHY, W/O. AYYAPPAN GOVINDAN, MALIYAN VEEDU, MARAVANTHURUTH, VADAKKEKARA, PARAVOOR TALUK. *ADDL. R2 TO R7 IMPLEADED ADDL.R2: VENUGOPAL, MALIYAM VEEDU, VALLIVATTOM, S.N. PURAM. ADDL.R3: GOPALAKRISHNAN, MALIYAM VEEDU, MARAVANTHURUTH, VATAKARA. ADDL.R4: CHANDRIKA, W/O. PRAKASHAN, PEREPADATH, PALARIVATTOM. ADDL.R5: KRISHNAKUMARI, W/O.PAVITHRAN, SAJIBHAVAN, MANAPURAM, ALUVA. ADDL.R6: INDIRA, W/O. BABU MOHANLAL, KANIYAMPURATH VEEDU, KOTHAMANGALAM. ADDL.R7: GOPINATHAN, SAI SREE, CANAL ROAD, PARAVUR. * ADDL. RESPONDENTS 2 TO 7 IMPLEADED AS THE LEGAL HEIRS OF THE DECEASED RESPONDENT WIDE ORDER DATED 5/8/2009 IN I.A.NO. 1865/2005. ADDL.R2 & R3 BY ADV. SRI.S.SUJITH ADDL.R4 TO R7 BY ADV. SRI.T.M.CHANDRAN THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... C.R.P.NO.2778 OF 2000 ............................................. Dated this the 3rd day of January, 2011. O R D E R This revision is preferred against the order of the Taluk Land Board, Paravoor in SM.1/91. The action to surrender excess land was initiated in the name of one Meenakshy, W/o. Ayyappan Govindan. The Taluk Land Board initiated action on the ground that she is holding 12.76.999 acres of land and therefore directed her to surrender the land in excess of 6 acres of land which she is entitled to possess underlaw. This was resisted by Meenakshy on the ground that Ayyappan Govindan died on 11.11.1988 and at the time of his death she had only 20 cents of land and therefore she cannot be directed to surrender any land. It has to be stated that proceedings under Section 87(1) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act can be initiated on the basis of subsequent acquisition after 1.1.1970 by different modes including inheritance. So the property of 12.76.999 acres belonged to Ayyappan Govindan. As on 1.1.1970 Ayyappan Govindan with his wife Meenakshy at least constituted a : 2 : C.R.P.NO.2778 OF 2000 family and therefore Ayyappan Govindan was entitled to possess 12 acres of land along with his wife. Of this 12 acres, prior to the death of Ayyappan Govindan and before the cut of date on 5.11.1974, 4.26 acres of land had been validly gifted in favour of his major children. So Ayyappan Govindan was not holding any excess land. Ayyappan Govindan died only on 11.11.1988. Ayyappan Govindan is not survived by his wife alone but from the documents it can be seen that he has got 3 or 4 children. So the succession or the inheritance opens right on the death of Ayyappan Govindan and therefore under the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act wife along with the children are equally entitled to have equal right over the property. When considered it shall be certainly below the ceiling area which can be possessed by a sole surviving widow i.e., 6 acres of land. It is also clear that there were other transactions, but I find that this Court need not go into those aspects and it can be found that on the death of Ayyappan Gvoindan, the property including the property that has been gifted which is to be excluded was approximately about 8 acres of land : 3 : C.R.P.NO.2778 OF 2000 which on the death of Ayyappan Govindan on 11.11.1988 had devolved upon his wife and children and none of the shares are said to be or found to be in possession of excess land especially Meenakshy that she is having more than 6 acres of property as the legal heir of the deceased Ayyappan Govindan. Therefore the action initiated under Section 87(1) itself was incorrect and so I find that the Taluk Land Board was perfectly justified in dropping the case holding that said Meenakshy was not liable to surrender any excess land. Since I am confirming the order of the Taluk Land Board, though the third respondent Gopalakrishnan is dead, his legal representatives are not to be brought on record. Accordingly, the C.R.P is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. cl : 4 : C.R.P.NO.2778 OF 2000 M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... C.R.P.NO.2778 OF 2000 ............................................. 3rd January, 2011. O R D E R