IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.PADMANABHAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 8TH PHALGUNA 1929 RP.No. 280 of 2003() -------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRP.1720/1993 Dated 13/01/2003 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/REVISION PETITIONERS/CLAIMANTS ------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. ARAKKAL MANUAL 2. ARAKKAL THOMAS 3. ARAKKAL CYRIAC. ALL ARE CHILDREN OF MICHEL RESIDING AT ARAKKAL HOUSE, MALOTH VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, MALOTH P.O., KASARGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.BABU SMT.N.SUDHA RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS ------------------------ 1. THE TALUK LAND BOARD, HOSDURG, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 2. TAHSILDAR, HOSDURG, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. DAKSHAYANI AMMA, W/O. O.T.K.NAMBIAR, RESIDING AT CHANDRAPURAM, KOTTACHERRY, P.O.KANHANGAD, KASARGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT. 5. O.T.K.NAMBIAR, RESIDING AT CHANDRAPURAM, KOTTACHERRY P.O.KANHANGAD, KASARGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT PREETHY KARUNAKARAN SMT.M.R.MINI SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI BASANT BALAJI SMT.MEENA THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. PADMANABHAN NAIR ,J. ------------------------------------------------- R.P.No.280 of 2003 ------------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 27th day of February, 2008 ORDER The grievance of the petitioners is that while extracting the pleadings I have made certain mistakes especially in the devolution of right. In my order I had stated that - “............Their further case is that Mani Amma sold the property to one Kunhirama Poduval in the year 1987 and from him Sri Manual purchased 3 acres Sri Thomas 2 acres and Cyriac 3 acres. It is also their case that Karunakaran Nambiar and his wife Dakshayani Amma have no right or possession over that land and they are the absolute owners of land. The Taluk Land Board accepted the case of Sri Mammad and others in respect of 7 acres . .............” According to the petitioners that statement is not correct. It is submitted that Mani Ammasold 3 acres to Kunhirama Poduval who in turn sold that property to first petitioner. It is also stated that the statement that the entire property was sold by Mani Amma to Kunhirama Poduval is not correct. There was no finding by this Court regarding the devolution of right. What was stated above was only by repeating the arguments made before the court. Taluk Land Board will have to consider the claim put forward by each claimants on the basis of the pleadings and evidence adduced before it. I make it clear that my observations regarding the pleadings and averments cannot be considered as a finding. RP No.280/2003 2 With the above observation, Review Petition is closed. K. PADMANABHAN NAIR, JUDGE. cks RP No.280/2003 3 K.PADMANABHAN NAIR, J. R.P.No.280 of 2003 ORDER 27th February, 2008.