IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 17TH MAGHA 1929 CRP.No. 78 of 2001(H) --------------------- SM.21/1976 of TALUK LAND BOARD, ALATHUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER: ------------------ RAMACHANDRAN, S/O. KUMARAN EZHUTHACHAN, POOLACKAL HOUSE, RAJA RICE MILL, KUTHANUR P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1.TALUK LAND BOARD, ALATHUR. 2.TAHSILDAR, ALATHUR. 3.STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4.KUMARAN EZHUTHACHAN, POOLACKAL HOUSE, RAJA RICE MILL, KUTHANUR P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. LATHA THANKAPPAN- R1 TO R3 THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER IN C.M.P. NO. 143 OF 2001 IN C.R.P. NO. 78 OF 2001. DISMISSED 6.2.2008 Sd/-(HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. --------------------------------------- C.R.P.NO. 78 OF 2001 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of February, 2008 O R D E R This revision is directed against the order dated 5.12.2000 of the Taluk Land Board, Alathur in S.M. No.21 of 1976. The revision petitioner who is the son of the declarant in the above Ceiling Case had filed an application under Section 85(8) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) before the Taluk Land Board. The proceedings against the father of the revision petitioner was finalised by the Taluk Land Board by order dated 17.6.1980 holding that the declarant is liable to surrender 12.29 acres of land. The revision petitioner filed a claim statement claiming separate right over some portions of the land ordered to be surrendered and also claimed exemption in respect of the property held by him. According to the revision petitioner, eight items of property are liable to be exempted from the property ordered to be surrendered. He seeks a declaration that the property held by him is not liable to be proceeded against as per the provisions of the Act. C.R.P.NO.78/2001 2 2. Learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submits that the claim of the petitioner was illegally rejected by the Taluk Land Board by the impugned order. The petitioner was a minor as on 1.1.1970 and he was a member of the statutory family. The contentions raised by the petitioner in the application under Section 85(8) of the Act are the contentions raised by his father as declarant in the Ceiling Case and the same was decided by the Taluk Land Board in its earlier order. The question whether a member of the statutory family who was a minor as on 1.1.1970 can again approach the court in a petition under Section 85(8) was considered by this Court on more than one occasion. The said question was examined by a Division Bench of this Court in the decision reported in Pramod v. State of Kerala, 1989(1) K.L.T. 803 and subsequently by a Single Bench of this Court in the decision reported in Ashraf v. State of Kerala, 1998(1) K.L.T. 737. In the light of the aforesaid decisions, a petition filed under Section 85(8) of the Act by a member of the statutory family who was a minor as on 1.1.1970 is not maintainable. In the result, without considering the questions raised in this revision on merits, this C.R.P. is dismissed holding that the petition filed C.R.P.NO.78/2001 3 by the revision petitioner under Section 85(8) of the Act is not maintainable. (HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) sp/ C.R.P.NO.78/2001 4 HAURN-UL-RASHID, J. C.R.P. NO.78 OF 2001 O R D E R 6TH FEBRUARY, 2008