MOOTHORAKUTTY Vs. CHIRUTHAKUTTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision Petition is coming up before us on the basis of an order to post the same along with C.R.P.No.1404 of 1988 referred to Full Bench by a separate order. As such there is no separate order of reference in this case indicating the question to be decided by the Full Bench. However, we may state the specific question arising for consideration in the Revision thus:

(2.) Briefly stated the relevant facts are thus: Petitioner is the landlord of the property scheduled to OA No. 58 of 1985 filed before the Land Tribunal, Kozhikode under S.80B of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (for short "the KLR Act"). Deceased father of the first respondent was admittedly a kudikidappukaran under the petitioner. On his death, his right as a kudikidappukaran in the application schedule property admittedly devolved on the first respondent and her brother, they being the only legal heirs of the deceased. Originally O.A.No.58 of 1985 was filed both by the first respondent and her brother. Later the brother filed an application to delete his name stating that he has joined in the application inadvertently and that he is an unnecessary party. That application, though opposed by the petitioner, was allowed by the Land Tribunal. It has to be noted that the brother of the first respondent filed the application for deleting his name only when the petitioner has pointed out that he owns and possesses about 68.5 cents of land where he could erect a homestead or a hut. First respondent is not admittedly having any land as owner or tenant either individually or along with any other person. The Land Tribunal after due enquiries allowed the application and granted the prayer for purchase of 10 cents of land in R.S.No.134/1 of Chelavoor Village and Desom wherein the hut occupied by the first respondent is situated. The order of the Land Tribunal was confirmed in appeal, A.A.No.160 of 1987, as per the order passed by the Appellate Authority (LR) dated 31-1-1989. The Appellate Authority in its order pointed out that it is on record that the site covered by the application had been in the possession of the petitioner's grand father at least from 1917 onwards and the petitioner has only inherited the property. Revision has been filed under S.103 of the KLR Act.

(3.) Relevant portions of the provisions contained in the K.L.R. Act with reference to which the question has to be decided can be usefully referred to at this stage. The main part of the definition of the word 'kudikidappukaran' contained in S.2(25) is in the following terms: