RAMAN Vs. AMMEDUTTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has arisen in a proceeding for restitution under S.144 CPC. The decree in O. S. No. 207 of 1954 on the file of the Munsiff, Kozhikode-I, allowed eviction of the defendants, and in execution thereof the plaintiffs took possession of the property; but on appeal by the defendants that decree has been reversed and that reversal has become final. Consequent on such reversal, the defendants moved E. A. No. 33 of 1955 for restitution of the property under S.144 CPC., which, it is regrettable to note, has not so far been disposed of. After the enactment of the Kerala Prevention of Eviction Act, XII of 1966, the present petitioner moved for his impleadment in the proceedings on the ground that he had been given an oral lease of part of the property by the 1st plaintiff in 1954 after she got possession in execution of the Munsiff's decree and a registered lease in renewal thereof in 1962 and been in possession and cultivation of the same since 1954 and as such he is entitled under the aforesaid Act of 1966, to immunity from ouster in these proceedings. The Munsiff dismissed that motion. Hence this Civil Revision Petition.

(2.) Counsel for petitioner contends that the petitioner is a Harijan tenant of part of the property concerned and as such entitled to the protection of S.3 of the Act XII of 1966.

(3.) S.3 prohibits eviction of tenants belonging to any Scheduled Caste. But, to attract that immunity the petitioner must be a tenant and the proceedings must be for eviction. I am afraid neither of those conditions is satisfied in the present case.