IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2011 / 9TH ASHADHA 1933 CRP.No. 220 of 2011() --------------------- AA.80/2000 of APPELLATE AUTHORITY (LR), ALAPPUZHA RC.2/1989 OF LAND TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANTS/APPLICANTS ------------------------------------------ 1. KOCHUPENNU,(DIED),W/O.AYYER,PADANNATHARA HOUSE,PERUMANNOOR DESOM,ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK. 2. GOPI,S/O.AYYAR,PADANNATHARA HOUSE, PERUMANNUR DESOM,ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK. 3. LOHITAKSHAN,S/O.AYYAR,PADANNATHARA HOUSE PERUMANNUR DESOM,ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.BABU RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. SMT.CELIN JOHN,(DIED),W/O.JOHN JOSEPH, PARAMBITHARA HOUSE,PERUMANNUR DESOM,ERNAKULAM VILLAGE,KANAYANNUR TALUK,PIN:682036. 2. SRI.JOSEPH ALEXANDER(DIED), S/O.JOHN JOSEPH,PARAMBITHARA HOUSE,PERUMANNUR DESOM,ERNAKULAMVILLAGE,KANAYANNUR TALUK, PIN:682036. 3. KUMARI VICTORIA JOSEPHINE, D/O.JOHN JOSEPH,PARAMBITHARA HOUSE,PERUMANNUR DESOM,ERNAKULAM VILLAGE,KANAYANNUR TALUK, PIN-682036. 4. ELIZABETH,W/O.STANLEY,PUNNAKKAYATH HOUSE,MULAVUKKAD.P.O,ERNAKULAM,PIN-682504. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------ C.R.P No.220 OF 2011 ------------------------------ Dated this the 30th day of June, 2011 ORDER One Thevan was a kudikidappukaran in the land belonging to one Alexander Parambithara. On the death of Thevan, his rights devolved on his children Ayyer and Kumaran. With the consent of Ayyer, Kumaran filed O.A.No.2469 of 1976 before the Land Tribunal for purchase of kudikidappu. That application was allowed and purchase certificate was granted in favour of Kumaran. 2. Thereafter, it is alleged that Kumaran and Ayyar trespassed upon a portion of the property belonging to the land owner. The land owner filed O.S.No.316 of 1985 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Ernakulam for recovery of possession of the plaint 'C' schedule property which was the trespassed portion. In the suit, the question of C.R.P No.220 OF 2011 2 kudikidappu was referred to the Land Tribunal. The Land Tribunal numbered the case as R.C.No.2 of 1989, which was disposed of on 25.5.1984 holding that the legal representatives of Ayyer are not entitled to get kudikidappu rights in respect of the plaint C schedule property. Accepting the finding of the Land Tribunal, the suit was decreed. The petitioners filed A.S.No.16 of 1995 before the Appellate Court. The appeal was allowed. The land owner/plaintiff filed S.A.No.424 of 2001 before the High Court. The Second Appeal was allowed and the case was remanded to the trial court for fresh disposal. After remand, the trial court decreed the suit, against which the petitioners filed A.S.No.227 of 2003 on the file of the District Court, Ernakulam. The District Court dismissed the appeal by the judgment and decree dated 16.12.2005. The District Court held that the ration card, voters list and the extract of property tax assessment register which were produced by the petitioners are fabricated documents. The Civil Court C.R.P No.220 OF 2011 3 thus finally held against the claim put forward by the petitioners herein, claiming rights under Ayyer. 3. Ayyer, the predecessor in interest of the petitioners had filed O.A.No.136 of 1981 before the Land Tribunal showing one Elizabath as the land owner. On finding that the correct person was not shown as the land owner, Ayyer filed a second Original Application as O.A.No.120 of 1982. After trial, the Land Tribunal dismissed O.A.No.120 of 1982. Against that order, the petitioners filed A.A.No.80 of 2000 before the Appellate Authority(originally filed as A.A.No.385 of 1994). The Appellate Authority after an elaborate consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, dismissed the appeal. The Revision is filed against the concurrent findings of the Land Tribunal and the Appellate Authority. 4. The kudikidappu rights belonged to Thevan. After C.R.P No.220 OF 2011 4 his death, his children Ayyer and Kumaran became the kudikidappukars. With the consent of Ayyer, Kumaran filed application before the Land Tribunal and he got purchase certificate. Later, Kumaran and Ayyar encroached upon a portion of the property belonging to the landlord which resulted in O.S.No.316 of 1985. In the civil suit and the appeal there from, the rights put forward by the petitioners were finally decided against them. The judgments of the civil court have become final and conclusive. Section 108A of the Kerala Land Reforms Act provides that “the provisions of Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, shall, so far as may be, apply to proceedings before the Land Tribunal”. Even before introduction of Section 108A by the Kerala Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1979 (Act 27 of 1979), this court had taken the view that the principles of res judicata would apply to the proceedings before the Land Tribunal. The findings rendered by the civil court having become final, they would operate as res C.R.P No.220 OF 2011 5 judicata in the proceedings in O.A.No.120 of 1982. The Appellate Authority rightly held that the petitioners cannot claim kudikidappu rights. The decision of the Appellate Authority does not suffer from any infirmity. No interference is called for under Section 103 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE. cms