IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 24TH BHADRA 1931 CRP.No. 819 of 2008 --------------------- AA.7/1998 of APPELLATE AUTHORITY, KANNUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER/1ST RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------------- KIZHAKKE POMATH BABURAJ, S/O.APPUKUTTY, OLAVANNA AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADV. MR.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI MS.C.G.PREETHA RESPONDENTS/APPELLANT & 2ND RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------------------ 1. SANTHIGIRI ASHRAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MUKTHIAR MUNNATHKANDI VINAYACHANDRAN, S/O.RAGHAVAN, P.O.MALAPARAMBA, KOZHIKODE-9. 2. MAMUNDAKARUVARU DEVASWOM, PADINHATTUMURI AMSOM, KIZHAKKUMURI AMSOM, KIZHAKKUMURI DESOM, KAKKODI. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.K.VINOD CHANDRAN FOR R1 &2 GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.RAVIKRISHNAN FOR R3 THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRP.No. 819 of 2008 ORDER ON I.A.NO.2589/2008 IN C.R.P.NO.819/2008 DISMISSED 15/9/2009 SD/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------- C.R.P.No.819 of 2008 --------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of September, 2009 O R D E R Revision is directed against the order dated 14.8.2008 in A.A.No.7 of 1998 passed by the Appellate Authority (LR), Kannur. In a suo motu proceedings initiated by the Land Tribunal, Kozhikode, petitioner was assigned the right, title, and interest over 4.20 acres of land in R.S.No.111/2 of Kakkodi Village, Kozhikode Taluk. Later, the respondent moved an appeal before the Appellate Authority contending that in the suo motu proceedings orders have been passed by the Land Tribunal without notice to it and it has got possession and enjoyment over 1.5 acres of the land assigned in favour of the petitioner. That appeal was dismissed for default on 5.1.2000. Against the order of the Appellate Authority the respondent preferred a revision as C.R.P.No.3092 of 2000 before this Court and the revision was allowed setting aside the order of the Appellate Authority directing it to restore the appeal and dispose it in accordance with law On such remission, after hearing both sides, the C.R.P.No.819 of 2008 2 Appellate Authority set aside the order of the Land Tribunal and remitted the case for fresh disposal. Propriety and correctness of that order is challenged in this revision. 2. I heard the counsel on both sides. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent had in respect of the 1.5 acres in the property covered by the proceedings suo motu proceedings had been taken as S.M.C.No.319 of 1997, over the claim of the respondent, but, it had been dismissed by order dated 9.7.2000. Correctness of that submission is doubted by the learned counsel for the respondent. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent that out of the 4.20 acres covered by the proceedings, the petitioner had already conveyed the right, title and interest from the respondent in respect of about 3 acres. So much so, the limited question before the Land Tribunal on remission of the case, according to the counsel, related to who has got right and possession of the remaining property. Since rival claims are placed on the property, adjudication of such claims in accordance with law, it is submitted by the counsel, is C.R.P.No.819 of 2008 3 essential. The question whether the suo motu proceedings initiated in respect of the claim of the respondent over 1.5 acres had been rejected or not may also be looked into by the Land Tribunal in the present proceedings. In the given facts of the case, there is no impropriety or illegality in the order passed by the Appellate Authority remitting the case for fresh consideration. Revision is dismissed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. bkn/-