CHALDEAN SYRIAN CHURCH TRICHUR Vs. LONAPPAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff-decree holder is the appellant. He obtained a decree in 0. S.17/24 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Trichur for the recovery of the plaint building and the site thereof with arrears and future mesne profits and filed E. P. 23/58 for the execution of the decree. Defendants 1, 2 and 4 who are respondents herein objected to the execution of the decree on the ground that eviction cannot be ordered and that eviction proceedings have to be stayed under the Kerala Stay of Eviction Proceedings Act 1/1957 as amended by the Kerala Stay of Eviction Proceedings Amendment Act (Act 30/1958). The learned Subordinate Judge upheld the contentions of the respondents holding that the building in question is a hut within the meaning of the Act and stayed the execution under S.5 of Act 1/1957.

(2.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that before a person can claim protection under the definition of Kudikidappukaran he must be a person who has no homestead or land of his own to erect a homestead and that the defendant had set up an independent title to the property stating that the claims of the church had been sold and purchased by him in court auction and that the plaintiff has no subsisting title. It was also stated that neither with regard to the nature of the materials used for the construction of the building in question nor with respect to the value does the building come within the term hut as contemplated in the section. It was also pointed out that the process of revaluation adopted by the learned Subordinate Judge is not warranted and if the valuation of the Commissioner as given in the Commissions account is accepted, the value would be more than Rs. 400/- and the building would not be a hut.

(3.) The short point that arises for determination in this appeal is whether the judgment - debtors are entitled to the benefits of Act 1 of 1957 as amended by Act