IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 4TH JULY 2008 / 13TH ASHADHA 1930 OP.No. 18508 of 2000(C) --------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- K.B.BADUVAN KUNHI, S/O.BABA BEARY, RESIDING AT KALPPARA IN ICHLANGODU VILLAGE AND POST, KASARAGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT. (DIED) ADDL. PETITIONER IMPLEADED. KHADEEJA, W/O. K.B.BADUVAN KUNHI (LATE), RESIDING AT KALPPARA IN ICHALANGODU VILLAGE AND POST, KASARAGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT. ADDL. PETITIONER IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT. 4.12.07 IN IA.16170/07. BY ADV. SRI.K.G.GOURI SANKAR RAI RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR, KASARAGOD P.O.KASARAGOD 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KASARAGOD AT KANHANGAD, P.O.KANHANGAD. 3. THE COMMISSIONER , LAND REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. GURUVA HARIJAN, S/O. CHOMA, RESIDING AT HEROOR VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK, P.O.HEROOR. 5. AISABI, W/O. LATE MEERANKUNHI, RESIDING AT KALPARA IN ICHALANGODU VILLAGE KASARAGOD TALUK, P.O.HEROOR. ADV. SRI.H.B.SHENOY FOR R5 SRI.B.ASHOK SHENOY FOR R5 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SANDESH RAJA FOR R1,2,3 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP. NO.18508/2000 ORDER ON CMP. NO.30808/2000 IN OP. 18508/2000 DISMISSED 04.07.2008 SD/- P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE tss S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== O.P.No. 18508 of 2000 ================== Dated this the 7th day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T The 1st petitioner, who is no more, purchased 0.47 acres of land in R.S.No.8/1E of Heroor Village from the 4th respondent, which was assigned to the 4th respondent by the 1st respondent, under the Kerala Land Assignment Act. The 2nd petitioner is the widow of the 1st petitioner who got herself impleaded as an additional petitioner on the death of the 1st petitioner. One K.M.Meerankunhi, the husband of the 5th respondent, challenged the same before the 2nd respondent by filing an appeal. The 2nd respondent allowed the appeal and remanded the matter to the 1st respondent for fresh disposal in accordance with law. Against the order in appeal, the 1st petitioner filed a revision petition before the Land Revenue Commissioner, which was dismissed by Ext.P2 order. Exts.P1 and P2 orders are under challenge in this original petition. 2. The contention of the 2nd petitioner is that although notice was given to the 1st petitioner by the 2nd respondent on the appeal, they were not given sufficient time to file a reply to the appeal memorandum and therefore, Ext.P1 and consequently Ext.P2 are violative of principles of natural justice. 3. After hearing, I am not inclined to interfere with the O.P.18508/00 2 impugned orders, in so far as the matter has only been remanded to the 1st respondent for fresh consideration. It would be open to the 2nd petitioner to take all her contentions which are available to the 2nd petitioner while the matter is considered afresh by the 1st respondent. Therefore, without prejudice to that right of the 2nd petitioner, this original petition is dismissed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge O.P.18508/00 3 S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== O.P.No. 18508 of 2000-C ================== J U D G M E N T 7th September, 2009