IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE THURSDAY, THE 9TH AUGUST 2007 / 18TH SRAVANA 1929 CRP.No. 196 of 2001(C) ---------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24.10.2000 IN TLB(K)9/87 OF THE TALUK LAND BOARD, KOZHIKODE .................... REVN. PETITIONERS: ------------------ 1. C.K.YESODA, W/O.LATE C.K.CHANDUKUTTY, THALAKULATHUR, KOZHIKODE. 2. C.K.HARIDAS, S/O. DO. DO. DO. 3. C.K.KRISHNADAS, S/O. DO. DO. DO. 4. C.K.GEETHA, D/O. DO. DO. DO. 5. C.K.CHANDRAN, S/O. DO. DO. DO. 6. C.K.RAMADAS, S/O. DO. DO. DO. 7. C.K.SREEMATHI, D/O. DO. DO. DO. BY SR.ADV.MR.T.KRISHNANUNNI ADV. SRI.C.P.MOHAMMED NIAS RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. TALUK LAND BOARD, KOZHIKODE. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.SHYSON P.MANGUZHA. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/08/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CMP NO.383 OF 2001 IN C.R.P.NO.196 OF 2001 DISMISSED. 9.8.2007 SD/- PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C.R.P.No.196 of 2001 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 9th August, 2007 ORDER The petitioners who are legal representatives of one C.K.Chandukutty challenge in this revision petitioner the order of the Taluk Land Board dated 24.10.2000 in a proceeding which was initiated under Section 87 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act directing the petitioners to surrender an extent of 1.68 and ½ acres of land as excess area held in excess of ceiling limits. The petitioners submit that previously by virtue of an order dated 15.9.1992, the Taluk Land Board had held that the family is liable to surrender 1.68 and ½ acres. The above order was challenged in C.R.P.No.2527/92 before this court and this court by order dated 17.11.1998 remanded the matter to the Taluk Land Board for fresh consideration in the light of the directions contained in that order. Pursuant to that remand order, the Taluk Land Board reconsidered the matter and passed the impugned order confirming the Taluk Land Board's earlier order and holding that the petitioners' family is liable to surrender 1.68 and ½ acres. 2. It was Mr.T.Krishnanunni, Senior Counsel who addressed me on behalf of the petitioners. Mr.Shyson P.Manguzha, learned Government Pleader would defend the case on behalf of the C.R.P.No.196/01 - 2 - respondets. 3. Mr.Krishnanunni would argue that the Taluk Land Board has not properly understood the scope of the remand order passed by this court and the directions in the remand order have not been properly complied with by the Taluk Land Board. The proceedings before the Taluk Land Board were not maintainable since sanction from the appropriate authority had not been obtained before initiating the proceedings. He would also argue that the Taluk Land Board erred in the computation of land owned by the family. The properties in the name of those petitioners who became majors after 1.1.1970 were to be excluded from the account as on date on which they became majors. This has not been done in this case. 94 cents belonging to the 2nd petitioner should have been deducted from the account of the family since the 2nd petitioner attained majority in 1977. 4. All the submissions of Mr.Krishnannunni were resisted by the Government Pleader. 5. I have perused the records. It is seen from the original order dated 15.9.1992 that the Taluk Land Board has recognised the sale by the petitioners in 1974 to a stranger in respect of 39 cents also. But in the present impugned order that sale is not seen recognised. C.R.P.No.196/01 - 3 - The newly introduced Section 7E will certainly have its implications on the sale of 1974. In fact in the revisional order of this court passed on 17.11.1998, this court had directed recalculation regarding the total extent of land held by the family as on 1.1.1970. It is clear that in the matter of recalculation that the Taluk Land Board has erred. The Government Pleader submitted that nothing was placed before the Taluk Land Board to show that a sale was effected in 1974. May be it is true that copy of that sale deed was not produced before the Taluk Land Board. But the order dated 15.9.1992 will show that the sale of 1974 regarding 39 cents was recognised in that order. Under these circumstances, I set aside the impugned order and remand the matter back to the Taluk Land Board for taking a fresh decision. The Taluk Land Board will re-determine the extent of land held by the family as on 1.1.1970 and the extent liable to be surrendered having due regard to the implications of Section 7E introduced in the Land Reforms Act by Act 21 of 2006. If necessary the petitioners will produce certified copy of the sale deed of 1974 before the Taluk Land Board. The C.R.P. is disposed of as above. No costs. srd PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE C.R.P.No.196/01 - 4 -