IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH JANUARY 2008 / 27TH POUSHA 1929 CRP.No. 601 of 2005() --------------------- SM.1/1997 of TALUK LAND BOARD, OTTAPALAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER: INTERESTPARTIES 1 TO 5 AND 7: ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. K.A.KUNHIMON, S/O.KOMPATHAYIL AMMU. 2. K.M.SHAMSUDHEEN, S/O.KOMPATHAYIL MOHAMMED KUTTY. 3. HAMZA, S/O.KOMPATHAYI MOHAMMED KUTTY. 4. M.LAILA, W/O.KOMPATHAYIL ABOOBACKER. 5. MOHAMMED SHAHEEN, S/O.KOMPATHAYIL ABOOBACKER. 6. SHABNA, D/O.KOMPATHAYIL ABOOBACKER, ALL ARE RESIDING AT POOKKODE AMSOM, PILLAKKAD DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH SRI.P.P.SURESHKUMAR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS AND DECLARANT & 6TH INTERESTED PARTY: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRSSENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE TALUK LAND BOARD, OTTAPPALAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 3. V.P.KANNAN NAIR, S/O.ACHUTHANNAIR, PRABHUNIVAS, CHUNANGAD POST, OTTAPPALAM TALUK. 4. AHAMED KMAL, S/O.KOMPATHAYIL ABOOBACKER POOKKODE AMSOM, PILLAKKAD DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK. R1 & R2 BY SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER R4 BY ADV. SRI.K.P.SUDHEER THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------- C.R.P. No. 601 OF 2005 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of January, 2008 O R D E R The revision petitioners filed claim petitions under Section 85 (8) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act in SM No.1 of 1997 on the file of the Taluk Land Board, Ottappalam. The Taluk Land Board rejected the claim petitions. The claimants are challenging in this revision, the order dt.28.02.05 passed by the Taluk Land Board. 2. As per the order dt.31.03.01, the Taluk Land Board held that the assessee, namely, Sri.V.P.Kannan Nair was holding excess lands. The assessee was directed to surrender an extend of 4.84 acres. The revision petitioners, the claimants, are claiming under registered documents executed by the assessee in the year 1986. Another objection raised by the claimants was in respect of 4.50 acres of land covered by document No.787/80 executed by Smt. Elzy Elizabeth and Prabhu(minor). The transferors got rights as per document No.773/80 executed by Smt.Parukutty Amma. It is stated that as on 01.01.70 Smt.Parukutty Amma was in possession of the land. 3. The Taluk Land Board rejected the contentions raised by the claimants on the ground that the transfers are hit by Section 84 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act and they are intended to defeat the ceiling CRP No.601 of 2005 2 provisions. As regards the claim in respect of the land covered by document No.787 of 1980, the Taluk Land Board held that an extent of 6.37 acres was purchased by the assessee, Kannan Nair, as per document No.431/69, out of the total extend of 7.77 acres and therefore the remaining extent available would be only 1.40 acres. 4. After the order passed by the Taluk Land Board, the Kerala Land Reforms Act was amended by the amendment Act of 2005(Act 21 of 2006). By the amended Act, Section 7(E) and Sub Section 4 of Section 84 were inserted. Section 7E reads as follows: “”7 E. Certain persons who acquired lands to be deemed tenants:-- Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in section 74 or section 84 or in any other provisions of this Act, or in any other law for the time being in force or in any contract, custom or usage, or in any judgment, decree or order of any court, tribunal or other authority, a person who at the commencement of the Kerala Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 2005, is in possession of any land, not exceeding four hectares in extent, acquired by him or his predecessor-in-interest by way of purchase or otherwise on payment of consideration from any person holding land in excess of the ceiling area; during the period between the date of the commencement of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (1 of 1964), and the date of commencement of the Kerala Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 2005, shall be deemed to be a tenant.” In Section 84, sub-section (4) was also inserted, which reads as follows: “(4) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections CRP No.601 of 2005 3 (1), (1 A) or (2), or in any judgment, decree, or order of any court, tribunal or other authority, no acquisition of land referred to in section 7E shall be deemed to be invalid, or ever to have been invalid by reason only of the fact that the land so acquired was found included as, or forming part of, the land liable to be surrendered by the transferor as excess land under the provisions of this Act and no suit or other proceedings including proceedings for eviction relating to the said land shall be instituted, maintained or continued in any court or tribunal against any person who is a deemed tenant under section 7E and every such suit or proceedings pending shall stand abated; Provided that, no ceiling cases wherein excess land has been physically taken over and distributed to landless labourers or reserved for public purposes as provided in this Act shall be reopened. Provided further that if the Taluk Land Board is satisfied that the transfer of land made by a person, in possession of excess land is calculated to defeat the ceiling provisions, it may take into account the land so transferred in determining his ceiling area and may direct him to surrender such extent of land held or possessed by him. Provided also that no ceiling cases or proceedings in which any land has already been surrendered by, or assumed from, a person as excess land before the commencement of the Kerala Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 2005, shall be reopened.” 5. In view of the amendment Act 21 of 2006, the matter requires reconsideration by the Taluk Land Board. An opportunity to put forward necessary contentions on the basis of the amendment Act shall be provided to the revision petitioners. The Taluk Land Board shall dispose of the matter afresh taking into account the amendment Act 21 of 2006 as well. CRP No.601 of 2005 4 For the aforesaid reasons, the order dt.28.02.05 passed by the Taluk Land Board is set aside and the case is remanded for fresh disposal in the light of the observations made above. The Taluk Land Board shall dispose of the case expeditiously. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE btt CRP No.601 of 2005 5