IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID FRIDAY, THE 27TH JUNE 2008 / 6TH ASHADHA 1930 CRP.No. 608 of 2000(E) ---------------------- CC.1(SM)8/1979/TVLA OF T.L.B.,THIRUVALLA .................... REVN. PETITIONER/DECLARANT ------------------------------- SMT.ELIZABETH IYPE(DIED) WIFE OF THE DECEASED GEORGE IYPE POTHIKOTTU, LALITHAVILASOM MEPRAL P.O, PERINGARA VILLAGE THIRUVALLA TALUK, REPRESENTED BY THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE AND DAUGHTER RENU THOMAS POOTHIKOTTU LALITHA VILASOM, MEPRAL P.O, PERINGARA VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK . BY ADV. SRI.O.V.MANIPRASAD SRI.GEORGE G.POOTHICOTE RESPONDENTS: /STATE AND INTERESTED PARTIES ------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA- REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF KERALA TRIVANDRUM 2. THE TALUK LAND BOARD, THIRUVALLA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN 3. SMT. GRACY CHACKO, KUZHUVELIL HOUSE MUDAKHALLOOR P.O, ATHOLY, QUILANDY KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 4. SRI.K.C.KOSHY, KUZHUVELIL HOUSE MUDAKHALLOOR P.O, ATHOLY, QUILANDY KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 5. SRI.THOMAS CHACKO, KUZHUVELIL HOUSE MUDAKHALLOOR P.O, ATHOLY, QUILANDY KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 6. SRI.K.C.VARGHESE KUZHUVELIL HOUSE MUDAKHALLOOR P.O, ATHOLY, QUILANDY KOZHIKODE DISTRICT BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.A.SALIM THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/06/2008, ALONG WITH C.R.P NO. 686/2000 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER IN C.M.P NO. 1266 OF 2000 IN C.R.P NO. 608 OF 2000 DISMISSED 27.06.2008 SD/- HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------------------------ C.R.P Nos. 608 & 686 of 2000 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of June 2008 ORDER The order of the Taluk Land Board Thiruvalla dated 29.01.2000 is under challenge in these two revision petitions. C.R.P 608/2000 is filed by the daughter of the deceased declarant Elizabeth Iype and C.R.P 686/2000 by interested parties. I am not referring to the earlier orders passed by the Taluk Land Board. The Taluk Land Board by order No. I (SM) 8/79/Tvla dated 3.8.1992( which is under challenge herein) ordered the declarant and the interested parties to surrender 11.34.000 acres of land as per Section 85 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. By order dated 30.11.1994 in C.R.P Nos. 2455 and 2541 of 1992 this Court directed the Taluk land Board to re-consider certain points and also further directed the Board to go by the option statement which was already filed by the declarant . Based on the decision in the aforesaid revision petitions, the Taluk land Board at page 2 of its order formulated 6 points and dealt with each point separately. 2. Point No. 1 is in respect of 1.50 acres of land lying as road. According to the declarant this extent is running through the rubber plantation and hence eligible for exemption The Taluk Land Board considered the issue with the help of the report of the Village Officer C.R.P Nos. 608 & 686 of 2000 -2- Atholy dated 20.4.1992. After perusing the records the Taluk Land Board observed that the records indicates that this extent comprising the road was already included in the area of plantation computed, thus already exempted. Therefore the request for further exemption of 1.50 acres is rightly rejected by the Taluk Land Board. 3. Point No. 2 is regarding 10 Cents of land in R.S. No. 11/3 of Balusserry village which was in the possession of the Kudikidappukaran. So the Board allowed the claim and exempted the said land. 4. Point No. 3 relates to the extent of 1.84 acres in Survey No 12/3 of Atholi Village The counsel for the declarant contended that the said property does not belong to the declarant or to the interested parties and therefore should have been excluded from the account of the assessee. The Taluk Land Board noted the endorsement of the Village Officer Atholi dated 20.041992 on an application filed by the interested parties indicates that there is a total extent of 2.32 acres in this Survey No. which is in the possession of other 6 holders and the declarant was not in possession of land in this Survey number. Report of the Special Deputy Tahsildar (LR) Quilandy dated 10.11.1979 stated that the declarant has land in this Survey number. The Option statement submitted by the declarant dated 12.11.1987 also indicates that the declarant has land in this Survey Number . So that claim was rejected by the Board. In the light of contradictory reports the Board shall re-consider the matter and C.R.P Nos. 608 & 686 of 2000 -3- decide the question afresh. 5. Point No. 4 relates to the actual extent of property in Survey No. 19/2B of Atholi Village According to the declarant the extent of property is only 5.65 acres as against 6.10 acres as shown in part A item (ii) of the proceedings . The Taluk Land Board held that the extrent of property as per Document No. 2014/1975 is 6 acres where as the extent of property as per possession certificate is 5.65 acres. The Taluk Land Board accepted the extent of property as stated in document No. 2014/1975 and fixed the extent as 6 acres instead of 6.10 acres. 6. This court observed in paragraph 3 of the judgment dated 30.11.1992 in C.R.P Nos 2455 and . 2541 of 1992 that there are certain mistakes in Part A and B of the order while showing the extent of the property. This Court in the said paragraph stated that the property was purchased by the declarant as per document No. 2014/1975 where the extent shown as only 5.65 acres and the Possession Certificate would also shows that the extent in his possession is only 5.65 acres. So in order to find out the correct extent of the property as to whether it is 5.65 acres or 6 acres, the Taluk Land Board shall make further enquiry and measure the property for the purpose of finding out the actual extent. 7. Point No. 5 is regarding the exact extent of property in Kaviyoor village As per the Land Board's order the extent is 57.87 acres. But it is contended by the declarant that the extent is only 51.60 C.R.P Nos. 608 & 686 of 2000 -4- acres Though this point is mentioned as No. 5, it is seen that the said point was omitted to be considered in its order. Therefore this Court directs the Taluk Land Board to consider point No. 5 afresh and shall take a decision. In Paragraphs 3 of the judgment of this Court dated 30.11.1994 in C.R.P Nos. 2455 & 2541 of 1992 it is specifically directed the Taluk Land Board to measure the property for the purpose of deciding the actual extent in Kaviyoor village. Therefore point No.5 requires re- consideration. 8. Point No. 6 also relates to the extent of rubber plantation in Balussery and Atholi villages The extent as in Part A is 25 acres but in Part B the extent is less than one acre. That question was considered by the Taluk Land Board and passed orders in favour of the declarant. 9. Lastly it is submitted by the counsel for the declarant that in spite of directions issued by this Court to the Taluk Land Board to go by the option statement already filed, in the judgment dated 30.11.1994 in the above mentioned Civil Revision petitions, the Board erroneously included 49 cents in Survey No. 149/18 149/16 of Peringara Village with the residential building wherein the declarant's family is residing. It is also submitted that the said property was not opted by the declarant, in the meantime there is a specific direction to the Taluk Land Board to accept the Option statement filed by the declarant It is not known under what C.R.P Nos. 608 & 686 of 2000 -5- circumstances the residential property of the declarant was included while Taluk Land Board is directed by this Court to go by the directions in the earlier Civil revision petitions and also to go by the option statement already submitted. The points which are directed to re-consider, shall be decided afresh after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard. The order shall be passed by the Taluk Land Board within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the result, these Civil Revision petitions are disposed of. There will be no order as to costs. HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE es