GOPI Vs. BHASKARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In O. S. No. 953/66, the plaintiff was granted a decree for recovery of the plaint schedule property. The property was Viruthi land.

(2.) A contention had been raised in the suit itself that in respect of Viruthi lands, the civil court could not exercise any jurisdiction in view of S.8 of the Viruthi Proclamation issued by His Highness the Maharaja of Travancore on 4th Edavom 1061 M E. An issue was framed whether the suit was maintainable, and after trial, the court held that S.8 did not bar its jurisdiction.

(3.) It is said that there were some proceedings in execution in the year 1969; but that history is not relevant. When E. P. No. 254/78 was filed, the 2nd judgment debtor raised an objection that he was a tenant entitled to fixity That was rejected and the matter was posted for delivery, to 3rd June, 1980. On 2nd June, 1980, the 2nd petitioner in the CRP. filed another objection contending that the decree itself was not executable as it was a nullity. The point raised again was that the court which passed the decree had no competence to make it in view of S.8 of the Viruthi Proclamation. That objection having been over ruled, its correctness is now being challenged in the present revision.