IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 27TH MARCH 2008 / 7TH CHAITHRA 1930 C.R.P.No. 1461 of 2002 ---------------------- ( SR.83/1997 of TALUK LAND BOARD, NILAMBUR) REVN. PETITIONER: --------------------------- STATE OF KERALA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. SHRI V.T.K. MOHANAN RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: -------------------------------------------- NADUVATHU MANAKAL CHERIYA SUBRAMANIAN NAMBOOTHIRI, NADUVATHU MANA, WANDOOR, MALAPPURAM BY ADV. SRI.V.R.KESAVA KAIMAL THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. ........................................................................ C.R.P. No.1461 OF 2002 ......................................................................... Dated this the 27th March, 2008 O R D E R The State has challenged the order dated 16.06.2000 passed by the Taluk Land Board, Nilambur in S.R.No.83 of 1997 . In the draft statement it is mentioned that the family of the declarant is having a total extent of 59.44 acres and that 3/7 shares belonged to the declarant would be 23.32 acres of land equivalent to 14.56 standard acres. 2. The declarant filed objections. The Taluk Land Board considered the objections and held that the declarant is holding an extent of 24.14 acres equivalent to to 13.03. standard acres. How the total extent increased from 23.32 acres to 24.14 is not clear from the order. The Taluk Land Board found that an extent of 2.12 acres is liable to be deleted from the account of the declarant. As is seen from the discussion at page 6 of the order, the 3/7 shares of the declarant over an extent of 2.92 acres, would come to 1.24 acres. The Taluk Land Board, while dealing with the objection No.5 held that an extent of 3 acres is liable to be exempted under Section 81 of the Act. So the total extent liable to be exempted and excluded from the account of the declarant would come to 4.24 acres. If the total extent is taken as 24.14 acres, as held by the Taluk Land Board, after taking into account the exemption and exclusion amounting to 4.24 acres, the balance extent available would be 19.90 acres. The declarant is entitled to retain an extent of 15 ordinary acres. Therefore, the balance extent to be surrendered is 4.90 acres of land. C.R.P. No.1461 OF 2002 2 3. C.R.No. 649 of 1973 is a ceiling case in which the declarant's father N.M. Cheriya Subramanian Namboodiri is the assessee. There is another ceiling case, viz., C.R.No.716 if 1973, in which the assessee is Narayanan Namboodiri, the brother of the declarant in the present case. The father of the declarant had surrendered an extent of 4 acres and 22 ½ cents in R.S.No. 178/1 and 177/1 as interim surrender in his ceiling case . R.S.No. 178/1 and 177/1 is included in the ceiling case of the respondent herein (declarant) as well since they are common properties belonging to the declarant, his father and other members of the family. A submission was made by the declarant before the Taluk Land Board that the father of the declarant was liable to surrender only an extent of 18 cents in C.R.No. 649 of 1973 and therefore, there will be a balance extent of 4.04 ½ acres which can be taken as excess surrender. The declarant prayed that this extent of 4.04 ½ acres may be treated as surrender by the declarant in the present case, so that he need surrender only the balance extent of 85 ½ cents. The Taluk Land Board accepted this contention. This finding is challenged by the State in this Revision. 4. The contention of the State is that C.R.No.649/73 is still pending decision on a tenancy claim. The counsel for the respondent/declarant submitted that in so far as the excess land to be surrendered by the declarant in C.R.No. 649/73, it was finally decided that the present declarant's father need surrender only 18 cents of land and therefore the pendency on a tenancy claim under Section 85(8) would not alter the situation. If at all it alters the situation, it would result in further reduction of the extent of land to be surrendered in C.R. 649 of 1973. Therefore, this contention raised by the State has no substance. Another contention raised by the State is that the extent of land surrendered by the declarant's father was not 4.24 acres. The Special Deputy C.R.P. No.1461 OF 2002 3 Tahsildar has reported that only an extent of 3.67 acres was surrendered as excess land. The Taluk Land Board has found that an extent of 4.24 acres of land was surrendered. The finding as to the extent of land actually surrendered cannot be the subject of a revision under section 103 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. The finding rendered by the Taluk Land Board that an extent of 4.24 acres was surrendered in C.R. 649 of 1973 is not liable to be interfered with in this Revision. For the aforesaid reasons, I am of the view that there is no scope for interference in this revision filed by the State. The Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE. lk