KAMALA DEVI Vs. LEELAMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner is the first wife of Isravel who died on 1st October 1980. Case of the Petitioner is that at the time of Isravel's death he was in possession of 5 acres of land in Sy. Nos. 222 and 223 of Kumily village, that S.M. 154/75 was pending before the Land Tribunal, Peermade with regard to 2 acre 75 cents in Sy. No. 222 of Kumily village, that after the death of Isravel the Petitioner and the first Respondent (second wife) were impleaded in S.M. 154 of 1975 and that Ext. P -1 purchase certificate was issued in their names. The grievance of the Petitioner is that in S.M. 15 of 1981 initiated in favour of the first Respondent before the Land Tribunal, Peermade which has been transferred to the Land Tribunal, Thodupuzha and renumbered as S.M. 90 of 1988 the Petitioner sought impleadment and that was refused. Petitioner filed the petition on knowing that the proceedings are initiated to assign the property in favour of the first Respondent. The Land Tribunal, Thodupuza as per Ext. P -4 order dismissed I.A. 1 of 1989.

(2.) THE question that arises for consideration is whether the Land Tribunal can implead a third party in a proceedings before it. Counsel for the Petitioner relied on Thressia v. Thankamma, 1980 (3) K.L.T. 378 where it was held that the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure relating to addition of parties apply to the proceedings under the Kerala Land Reforms Act. Counsel for the Respondents pointed out that the above decision does not refer to a Division Bench ruling of this Court in Subramaniya Iyer v. Taluk Land Board, 1985 1 K.L.T. 140 where it is held that there is no power under the Kerala Land Reforms Aet, 1963 enabling the Taluk Land Board to implead a stranger, and power is specifically conferred under Rule 92(3) of the Kerala Land Reforms (Tenancy) Rules, 1970 to implead certain persons who are the legal representatives of a deceased party in a proceeding pending before the Board. This decision was not brought to the notice of the Court which decided the case reported in, 1989 (2) K.L.T. 378.

(3.) RULE 92 of the Kerala Land Reforms (Tenancy) Rules prescribes the powers of the Land Tribunal. Rule 92 enables the Land Tribunal to issue commissions, grant injunctions, appoint receivers and pass interlocutory orders during the pendency of the proceeding as found necessary by the Tribunal to be just and proper to meet the ends of justice. A reading of Rule 92(3) clearly shows that the Rule does not empower the Land Tribunal to implead any third party. It is vested only with the power to implead additional parties who are the legal representatives of a deceased party in any proceedings before it. As the Land Tribunal is a statutory Tribunal constituted under Section 99 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act and its powers and jurisdiction are confined to those that are specifically mentioned in the Act and Rules it has to be held that the Land Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to implead a third party to any proceedings before it.