GOPINATHA PILLAI Vs. SUNDARESAN PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) First Judgment Debtor in O.S. 219 of 1986 is the revision petitioner. For executing the decree the respondent decree holder filed E.P.3 of 1993. In answer to the notice of delivery revision petitioner filed objections. He contended that as he is entitled to Kudikidappu right with respect to the building in the plaint schedule property the execution has to be stayed under S.125(3) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1964 (for short 'the Act') and the said question has to be referred to the land tribunal. The execution court over ruled the objection by the impugned order dated 1-2-1994. This revision is directed against the said order.

(2.) The decree declared the plaintiff's title and possession over the plaint A schedule property measuring 1 1/2 cents and restrained the defendants by a permanent prohibitory injunction from committing waste in the plaint A schedule property or making any alteration to the structures in it. First defendant was directed by a mandatory injunction to vacate the B schedule building within a period of six months from the date of the decree, and also decreed if the first defendant failed to vacate the building the plaintiff is at liberty to evict him through court. Since the first defendant did not vacate the building as directed in the decree the E.P. was filed for delivery of the said building. It is against the said execution petition that the revision petitioner filed the aforesaid objection.

(3.) It is admitted that against the said decree the revision petitioner preferred A.S.73 of 1992 before the Sub Court, Attingal and the appellate court dismissed the appeal on 30-7-1993.