HAMEED Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE little man, the hutment dweller, now needs protections by Tribunals, Courts, and possibly even by the legislature; That at any rate, is the impression generated by the sordid story involved in this case. The tragic element is common to very many cases of that type of them, details could be given later. The chronology of the events in the case and the Court's conclusion thereon may be attempted first. Avaru is a land owner in Chavakkad. He is fortunate in very many ways. He had had a gainful employment in Malaysia from where he has recently returned. He owns extensive landed properties. His residence is a Palatial mansion, 8 rooms spread over a 20 cent area. The residential compound itself has an extent of 50 cents. That is only part of a larger area admeasuring 1 acre 50 cents owned by him. Just opposite is yet another stretch of land abutting the public way, and having an area of 45 cents.

(2.) THE land owner had four sons and a daughter. Two of the sons are majors and are married. Two are yet to marry.

(3.) THERE is a hutment dweller in a portion of 1 acre 50 cents of property of the land owner The hutment dweller was happy when the Land Reforms Act conferred valuable rights on him. He attempted to avail of them. An application for purchase was filed. That was allowed, initially. Yet, that was not the final phase. The land owner can appeal He did appeal. The Appellate Authority detected a procedural irregularity. The result was the upsetting of the order of the Land Tribunal. The matter was remitted back.