MANGALA RAO Vs. G.RAJAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners herein are the decree holders in O.S.No.516 of 1991 on the file of the Court of the Second Additional Subordinate Judge of Ernakulam. The suit was instituted by the predecessor -in -interest of the petitioners was one for recovery of possession of the plaint schedule property on the strength of title , with damages for use and occupation. The predecessor -in -interest of the respondents who was the sole defendant in the suit, resisted the suit by filing a written statement wherein he inter alia claimed fixity of tenure under section 106 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963. After trial the suit was decreed by Ext.P1 judgment delivered on 23.11.1992. The operative portion of Ext.P1 judgment reads as follows:

(2.) AGGRIEVED thereby, the defendant filed A.S.No.528 of 1993 in this Court. While that appeal was pending, the defendant passed away and thereupon, the respondents herein were impleaded as additional appellants 2 to 4 in the appeal. Later, the plaintiff also passed away thereupon, the petitioners herein were impleaded as additional respondents 2 to 4 in the appeal. A.S.No.528 of 1993 was pending in this Court for nearly 19 years until the appeal was heard and dismissed by Ext.P2 judgment delivered on 7.9.2012. This Court held that the transaction between the parties is only a license arrangement and not a lease, that the defendants are not entitled to the protection of section 106 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act and that on the terms of the license arrangement the defendants are not entitled to value of improvements. This Court accordingly upheld the findings of the trial Court and dismissed the appeal. The operative portion of Ext.P2 judgment reads as follows:

(3.) THE second petitioner herein, on his own behalf and on behalf of the other decree holders filed Ext.P6 objections dated 30.8.2013 wherein in paragraphs 3 to 5, he averred as follows.