IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH MARCH 2008 / 22ND PHALGUNA 1929 CRP.No. 239 of 2008() --------------------- CC.140/1973 of TALUK LAND BOARD, MANNARKKAD .................... REVN. PETITIONERS: ------------------------------- 1. SMT. BEEVIKUTTY, W/O.VEERAPPU, MANKADAKUZHIYIL HOUSE, KOTTAPPURAM (P.O) OTTAPALAM TALUK. 2. SMT. SAINABHA, W/O.N.P.ABOOBACKER, NEYYAPPADATH HOUSE, ARIYOOR (P.O) MANNARKKAD TALUK. 3. SMT. KHADEEJA, W/O.ABDUL JABBAR, PUTHENPURACKAL HOUSE, MUNDERAKKAD, MANNARKKAD. 4. SMT. PATHUNNI, W/O.MOHAMMADALI, MALAYIL HOUSE, KUMARAMPUTHUR, MANNARKKAD. 5. SMT. JAMEELA, W/O.ASSAINAR, AYISHA MANZIL, MANNARKKAD (P.O) 6. SMT. SUBAIDA, W/O.HAMZA, PARALIYIL HOUSE, PAYYANEDAM (P.O), MANNARKKAD. 7. A. MUHAMMED, S/O.KUNHALAVI HAJEE, ACHIPRA HOUSE, P.O. BEEMANAD, KOTTOPPADAM, MANNARKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.) SRI.S.SUJIN Kss ..2/- ..2.... C.R.P.NO.239/2008 RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. TALUK LAND BOARD, MANNARKKAD. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, MANNARKKAD. 3. STATE OF KERALA - REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. R. BINDU THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ORDER ON I.A.NO.670/2008 IN C.R.P.NO.239/2008 DISMISSED 12/03/2008 SD/-M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = C.R.P. NO. 239 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 12th day of March, 2008. O R D E R This revision petition is preferred against the order of the Taluk Land Board dated 22.1.08 in C.C.140/73. After 35 years the matter has again come in the form of revision. The question that has been considered by the Taluk Land Board was with respect to the applicability of Section 7(E) of the Act 2 of 2006. The Taluk Land Board held that the question that arose for consideration was with reference to the allotment of properties in a partition deed among the declarant's family. Under Section 7(E) there is a stipulation that a land in question should have been acquired by way of purchase or in other words on payment of consideration from any person holding the land in excess of the ceiling area. So it relates to a transfer effected by a person holding the land in excess of the ceiling area to a person for consideration and naturally he must be a stranger. The Court below hold that since the CRP NO. 239 of 2008 -:2:- claimants are only members of a family and they are claiming under the colour of a partition, Section 7(E) will not be applicable therefore rejected the prayer and I do not find any mistake committed by the Taluk Land Board. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended before me that the Taluk Land Board should have taken into account that if the area is found to be less than 20 acres they will be entitled to claim sufficient extent to make it 20 acres and balance alone need be surrendered. In this petition I cannot entertain this contention for the reason that the matter has reached this Court on so many occasions and on all those occasions the C.R.Ps. had been dismissed and the order passed by the Taluk Land Board had attained finality and only by the provisions under Section 7(E) that not withstanding anything contained in any decree or order a consideration was done with respect to the claim under Section 7(E). So this Court cannot again reopen the matter and extend the life of the litigation when this Court on innumerable occasions had dismissed the C.R.P. filed by CRP NO. 239 of 2008 -:3:- declarants and their family members. So I do not want to consider that aspect in this belated stage and therefore this C.R.P. is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-