IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH JANUARY 2008 / 10TH MAGHA 1929 CRP.No. 1846 of 2001() -------------------------------- SMP.3/1997 of TALUK LAND BOARD, NILAMBUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER: -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.R.BINDU RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. SRI.MOHAMMED ALIAS BAPUTTY, S/O. NELLANGADAN KUNHAMMED HAJI, VELLAYUR. 2. SRI.ABDUL RAFEEQUE, S/O. DO. 3. SRI.MOIDEEN, S/O. DO. 4. SMT.UNNIACHUTTY, D/O. DO. 5. SMT.FATHIMA, D/O. DO. 6. SMT.NABEESA, D/O. DO. 7. SMT.AMINA D/O. DO. 8. SMT.SAINABHA, D/O. DO. 9. SMT.JAMEELA, D/O. DO. 10. BALKEES , D/O. DO. DO. 11. SRI.NEELANGADAN ALAVI, S/O. MUHAMMED MUSALIAR, VELLAYUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.SURESH KUMAR THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- C.R.P. NO. 1846 OF 2001 --------------------- Dated this the 30th day of January, 2008 ORDER This revision petition is preferred against the order of the Taluk Land Board, Nilambur in SMP 3/97. By the said order, the Taluk Land Board excluded 3.20 acres of land in R.S. No.567/1B1 of Vellayur Village from the declarants account in the ceiling case. As per the grounds stated in the revision memorandum, documents are not produced and that the Taluk Land Board went wrong in deleting that extent from R.S. No.579/1B1. 2. I have perused the order of the Taluk Land Board. The Taluk Land Board had considered the matter elaborately. It can be seen that the land was purchased by the claimant from one Meenakshy Amma. The said Meenakshy Amma had purchased the land by a registered document of 1952. Further, it is evident that the said property was set apart to the share of Meenakshy Amma, as per the partition decree in OS 496/53. Meenakshy Amma had purchased the land from Neelangadan Kunhimohammed, the declarant as per document No.2456 of 1952. So the right title and interest of C.R.P. No. 1846/01 2 Neelangadan Kunhimohammed was lost in the year 1952 and by subsequent transfer the property came into the hands of the applicant. Therefore as on 1.1.70 that land could not have been taken into consideration for fixing the ceiling limit of Neelangadan Kunhimohammed. Therefore the said finding of the Taluk Land Board is totally justified. So far as deletion is concerned, when total extent of 3.20 acres is to be excluded from the ceiling limit necessarily the area to be surrendered has to be reduced to that extent. For that purpose, the property to be surrendered from other survey numbers necessarily has to be excluded. I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the order passed by the Taluk land Board. This civil revision petition lacks merit and it is accordingly dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps C.R.P. No. 1846/01 3 M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ------------------------- CRP NO.1846/01 --------------------- ORDER 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2008 C.R.P. No. 1846/01 4