IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH DECEMBER 2009 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 CRP.No. 650 of 2009 --------------------- AA.32/1993 of APPELLATE AUTHORITY (LR), KANNUR OA.3025/1971 of LAND TRIBUNAL (NO.II), KASARGOD .................... REVN. PETITIONER/APPELLANT/LR OF ORIGINAL RESPONDENT: --------------------------------------------------------------------- K.KRISHNA BHAT, S/O. K.GANAPATHI BHAT, KARUVAJE HOUSE, BAYAR VILLAGE P.O., DHARMATHADKA, KASARGOD TALUK. BY ADV. MR.SURESH KUMAR KODOTH RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND LRs: ------------------------------------------------------------- 1. POLLUNJI, W/O.LATE SUBBA MOOLYA, RESIDING AT KARUVAJE, BAYAR VILLAGE, P.O DHARMATHADKA, KASARGOD TALUK - 671321 2. MANHANNA MOOLYA, S/O.LATE SUBBA MOOLYA, RESIDING AT KARUVAJE, BAYAR VILLAGE, P.O DHARMATHADKA, KASARGOD TALUK - 671321 3. MANI MOOLYA, S/O. LATE SUBBA MOOLYA, RESIDING AT KARUVAJE, BAYAR VILLAGE, P.O DHARMATHADKA, KASARGOD TALUK - 671321 4. DEVAKI, W/O. LATE THAYAMPA MOOLYA, RESIDING AT KARUVAJE, BAYAR VILLAGE, P.O DHARMATHADKA, KASARGOD TALUK - 671321 5. RAMA MOOLYA, S/O.LATE THAYAMPA MOOLYA, RESIDING AT KARUVAJE, BAYAR VILLAGE, P.O DHARMATHADKA, KASARGOD TALUK - 671321 6. VASANTHI, D/O.LATE THAYAMPA MOOLYA, RESIDING AT KARUVAJE, BAYAR VILLAGE, P.O DHARMATHADKA, KASARGOD TALUK - 671321 7. JAYASREE, S/O. LATE THAYAMPA MOOLYA, RESIDING AT KARUVAJE, BAYAR VILLAGE, P.O DHARMATHADKA, KASARGOD TALUK - 671321 8. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNEMNT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. MR.K.G.GOWRISHANKAR RAI FOR R1 TO 7 MR. P.K.RAVIKRISHNAN, GP FOR R8. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------- C.R.P.No.650 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of December, 2009 O R D E R Challenge raised in the revision is against the judgment rendered in E.A.No.32 of 1993 passed by the Appellate Authority, (LR) Kannur. Predecessor of the respondent was issued a purchase certificate in respect of the property covered by O.A.No.3025 of 1971 by order dated 16.2.1976 by the Land Tribunal No.II, Kasargode. Proceedings in the O.A. culminating in the order was passed with the predecessor of the present petitioner, his father, the landlord, as the respondent, who was the then manager of the family. Order issuing purchase certificate was sought to be assailed in appeal by the present petitioner with a petition to condone delay of 17 years. That appeal after hearing both sides was dismissed by the Appellate Authority under the impugned judgment. Correctness and propriety of that judgment is challenged invoking the revisional jurisdiction vested with this Court. 2. I heard the learned counsel on both sides. C.R.P.No.650 of 2009 2 3. From the submissions made at the time of hearing, it is seen, previously the elder brother of the petitioner had filed another revision against the very same order as C.R.P.No.1488 of 1997 after unsuccessfully challenging the order before the Appellate Authority with a petition to condone delay of seven years. That revision was dismissed. Pursuant to the dismissal of that petition, the present petitioner claiming right over the property on the basis of the allotment purported to have been made under a partition executed in 1984 in his family filed the present appeal with a petition to condone the delay of 17 years. Claim of the petitioner over the property covered by the purchase certificate is based only on the allotment under the above partition deed. Purchase certificate was issued with the predecessor of the petitioner, his father, in the party array. Challenge made against that purchase certificate issued, previously, by his elder brother before the Appellate Authority and also in revision had been turned down as meritless. In the above circumstances, the conclusion formed by the Appellate Authority, there is no merit in the challenge canvassed by the C.R.P.No.650 of 2009 3 petitioner against the issue of the purchase certificate in favour of the predecessor of the respondent is unassailable. There is no merit in the revision, and it is dismissed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. bkn/-