DEVASSYKUTTY S/O ANTONY Vs. ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR MUKUNDAPURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners case is that they are in possession of the parcel of land involved in a ceiling proceedings and they cannot be evicted from that land, pursuant to Ext.P8 notice issued by the Tahsildar. As seen from Ext.P8, Tahsildar proceeded as thoughthe petitioner is an encroacher. Tahsildar directed the petitioners to vacate the illegal occupation of the land.

(2.) Petitioners' contention is that they were put in possession pursuant to unregistered sale deed on a consideration paid to the declarant and they are entitled for protection under Section 7 E of the Kerala Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 2005. It is to be noted that the petitioners had no established right. The petitioners cannot challenge Ext.P8 without establishing any right under the Kerala. Land Reforms Act. Petitioners remedy lies elsewhere.