JOB ALIAS KOCHUKUTTY Vs. ABRAHAM THARAKAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The controversy in this petition centres round S.8 of the Kerala Prevention of Eviction Act, 1966. The long title of the Act shows that the enactment is intended "to provide for the prevention of eviction of cultivating tenants, holders of kudiyiruppus and kudikidappukars from their holdings, kudiyiruppus or kudikidappus, as the case may be, in the State of Kerala and for the restoration in certain cases of the possession thereof and for matters connected therewith".

(2.) S.8 of the Act deals with the stay of suits or other proceedings for eviction. It reads as follows:

(3.) The order from which this petition arises referred to S.8 and said: "From a reading of the section it is clear that in order that the provisions of the section are to be applicable there should be the case of an admitted tenancy, kudikidappu or kudiyiruppu. In this case the plaintiff does not admit that the defendant is either a cultivating tenant, kudiyiruppukaran or kudikidappukaran Therefore so long as the fact whether the defendant petitioner is a kudikidappukaran, kudiyiruppukaran or a cultivating tenant is not determined, the suit cannot be stayed under S.8 of Act 12 of 1966. The petition is therefore dismissed."