IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2008 / 8TH MAGHA 1929 CRP.No. 1070 of 2000(F) --------------------------------- LAA.118/1998 of APPELLATE AUTHORITY (LR), ALAPPUZHA OS.127/1981 of LAND TRIBUNAL, KOLLAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER: RESPONDENT/ RESPONDENT ---------------------------- KUNJUMON, LURDE BHAVAN, MAYYANAD P.O., KOLLAM FROM SANKU PILLAI COLONY, KURUVITHOTTAM, THARAYIL, THOTTAMUKKU, KOLLAM/ BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR RESPONDENTS: L.Rs. OF THE APPLICANT:- LRs. OF THE APPELLANT ------------------------ 1. TRESA, W/O. GEORGE PETER, H & LANE, PALLITHOTTAM, KOLLAM. 2. JOY , S/O. GEORGE PETER, OF DO. DO. 3. RAJU, S/O. GEORGE PETER, OF DO. DO. 4. SHAJI, S/O. GEORGE PETER OF DO. DO. 5. BEENA, D/O. GEORGE PETER OF DO. DO. 6. PREETHA, D/O. GEORGE PETER, OF DO. DO. 7. VIJI, D/O. GEORGE PETER, OF DO. DO. 8. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.E.M.SUNIL KUMAR R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.BINDU. SRI.BIMAL K.NATH SRI.S.JAMAL RI.SREEVALSAN.V SMT.SMITHA DIVAKARAN THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- C.R.P. NO. 1070 OF 2000 --------------------- Dated this the 28th day of January, 2008 ORDER This revision petition is preferred against the order of the Appellate Authority, Alappuzha, in AA 118/98. The appellant therein is the alleged tenant. The Land Tribunal by virtue of the order dated 7.8.94 held that the appellant is not entitled to kudikidappu right. The Land Tribunal found that the date of occupation is not proved. It is also stated that he is occupying the building and the hut nearby but there is no proof to consider his application for occupation as a kudikidappukaran. The court also found that there is no relationship of a landlord and kudikidappukaran in the matter. After considering the entire mater in detail, the court dismissed the prayer for purchase of kudikidappu. The appellate court just on the factum of a survey number held that the petitioner is a kudikidappukaran and reversed the order of the Land Tribunal. The Land Tribunal has considered the documents and had arrived at a finding, which has been interfered without a reasoning by the appellate authority. C.R.P. No.1070/00 2 2. As I am not having the presence of the respondents in the appeal before me, it is only possible in the course to remit the case back to the appellate authority to consider the matter afresh after hearing both sides. Therefore, the order of the appellate authority is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the appellate authority for fresh consideration and disposal. The court shall fix the date of appearance by sending notice by registered post with acknowledgment due to the parties and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps C.R.P. No.1070/00 3