NEELAKANTAN Vs. CHERIAN IYPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I think the Courts below were right in holding that an occupation in assertion of a mortgage right cannot be the origin of a Kudikidappu - see the words but otherwise has no interest in the land in S.2 (3) of Act 1/57 as amended by Act 30/58 - and that Explanation I to the sub-section cannot avail the occupier even if that sub-section can be construed as saying anything more than that a person in occupation with permission - permission being a necessary ingredient of a kudikidappu as defined - shall be deemed to be in occupation with permission.