SHEIK ABDUL SALAM Vs. SAIBUNNISA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Against the Judgment in A. A. No. 47/1993 on the file of the Appellate Authority (LR), Thrissur, this appeal is filed by the appellants. The said appeal is against the order in O. A. No. 32/1991 of the Land Tribunal, Thrissur. Petitioners and respondents 9 and 10 are the legal heirs of Sheik Ammer Hussain Saheb, who was filed the application under S.80(B) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, for purchase of kudikidappu to an extent of 3 1/3 cents in Sy. No. 1317 of Thrissur Village. The case of the applicant was that with permission of the landlady, he has constructed a homestead in the property. The owner of the property is the mother inlaw of the applicant. The applicant is in continuous occupation of the property since 1940 without any interruption and obstruction and he has no landed property to construct a building. So he is entitled to purchase his kudikidappu.

(2.) The respondents filed objection denying the right of kudikidappu. The property in question was partitioned in O.S. No. 470/1974 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Thrissur. The wife of the original applicant is a cosharer of the said property. The house bearing No. 25/496 claimed to be kudikidappu is not a hut and the costs of construction was Rs. 10,000 and the rent that would have been fetched was Rs. 150 per month at the time of construction. The original applicant is not a kudikidappukaran. The application is liable to be dismissed.

(3.) The Revenue Inspector attached to the Land Tribunal filed a report which would reveal that the applicant and family members are residing in the hut for the last 50 years and it was constructed by the applicant spending his own money. Original building was totally destroyed in whirl-storm occurred in the year 1940.