STATE OF KERALA Vs. DOMINIC CYRIAC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge in O.P. No. 17509/1995 directing the second respondent Director of Panchayat to act upon and implement the resolution (Ext. P3) dated 20.4.1993 and thereby grant release of the land which is the subject matter of the petition after charging the amount as per rules by way of transfer of assignment, keeping in mind the recommendations of the District Panchayat Officer (Ext. P4) dated 24.5.1993.

(2.) The facts necessary for deciding this appeal are as follows: -

(3.) The first respondent owns 20 cents of land in survey No. 2250/2 and was in possession of 11.5 cents of land adjacent thereto in survey No. 721/1 of Moonnilavu Village for more than 40 years as in the year 1993. The said 11.5 cents of land of which he was in possession lies on the bank of a river called Kadavupuzha. The said 11.5 cents of land has been under the uninterrupted possession of the first respondent and his predecessors in title for more than a century. The Melukavu Panchayat made an attempt to take possession of this property. The first respondent filed a petition before the Deputy Director of Panchayat which was allowed on 26.3.1993. The first respondent filed a representation dated 19.3.1993 (Ext. P2) and requested the second respondent Panchayat to take steps to assign the said 11.5 cents of land to the first respondent. The first respondent pointed out that the said 11.5 cents of land was always under the adverse possession and occupation of the first respondent for almost half a century and, before him, under the adverse possession and control of his predecessor in interest. Thus, he has entitled to claim title to the said land by adverse possession. He also pointed out that it was essential for him to take steps on this land so that his other land could be protected against soil erosion due to flow of the river Kadavupuzha. It was also pointed out that the Kadavupuzha river takes a very sharp bend at the point of the first respondents property, causing damage to the property of the first respondent, which might also cause danger to the Moonnilavu - Vakakkad bridge. So, for reasons of better enjoyment of his property, and also to ensure that he would be able to take steps on the said land, the first respondent made representation to the Panchayat.