VASUDEVAN NAIR Vs. PARAMESWARAN NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant in E. P. No. 55 of 1987 In O. A. No. 928 of 1970, Land Tribunal, Alappuzha (appellant in A. A. No. 15 of 1988, Appellate Authority (L. R), Alappuzha) is the revision petitioner. This revision is filed under S.103 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. The revision petitioner assails the order passed by the Appellate Authority dated 6-11-1991 confirming the order passed by the Land Tribunal, Alappuzha dated 27-1-1988. The prayer of the revision petitioner to extend the time for deposit of the purchase price was rejected.

(2.) The short facts necessary for adjudicating the controversy are as follows: The revision petitioner was the applicant in O. A. No. 928 of 1970, Land Tribunal, Kollam. He filed an application under S.13-A of the Kerala Land Reforms Act stating that he was holding the scheduled property, viz. 68 1/2 cents, on Ottikuzhikanam, and that the respondent filed O. S. No. 267 of 1964 before the Munsiff Court, Mavelikkara and obtained a decree for redemption and dispossessed the applicant on 16-12-1968 and 29-3-1969. The revision petitioner - applicant was a tenant at the time of dispossession and prayed that he may be allowed restoration of the scheduled property and he is prepared to deposit the amount received by him from the civil court. The Land Tribunal, by order dated 27-7-1973, held that the revision petitioner is entitled to restoration of the scheduled property, viz, 68 1/2 cents, on deposit of Rs. 21,303.33 and that the applicant wilt deposit the amount within one month, with notice to the other side and file execution petition for effecting delivery. Both the applicant and the respondent filed appeals, L. R. A. S. Nos. 71 and 83 of 1977, before the Appellate Authority (L. R), Ernakulam. The appeals were dismissed by a common order on 21-12-1979. Against the decision of the Appellate Authority in L. R. A. S. No. 83 of 1977, the respondent filed C. R P. No. 1677 of 1980 before this Court. By judgment dated 19 6-1986, the revision petition was dismissed. Nearly a year thereafter, the revision petitioner (applicant before the Land Tribunal) filed execution petition on 24-6-1987. He filed I. A. No. 15A/87 on 3-7-1987 praying that he may be allowed to deposit the value of improvements after condoning the delay in remitting the same. The respondent in O. A. No. 928 of 1970 filed objections to the execution petition and also the petition for condonation of delay. The Land Tribunal, in a carefully Considered order dated 27-1-1988, adverted to R.130 of the Kerala Land Reforms (Tenancy) Rules, 1970, which clothes the Tribunal with jurisdiction to extend the time fixed by it for doing any act prescribed or allowed by the rules or to extend the period fixed by it and observed that there is Inordinate delay In making the deposit and the petition for condonation of delay deserves to be dismissed. The petition to condone the delay was dismissed. In consequence, the execution petition was also dismissed. The said order was affirmed in appeal by the Appellate Authority in A. A. No. 15 of 1988, by judgment dated 6-11-1991. It is the aforesaid orders that are challenged in the revision petition.

(3.) I heard counsel for the petitioner, Mr. P. G. Parameswara Panicker and Mr. P. Gopal and also counsel for the respondent, Mr. T. R. Raman Pillai.