PURUSHOTHAMAN NAIR Vs. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This suo motu revision is taken against the order passed by the Munsiff. Attingal, in OS. 298 of 1976. The plaintiff Devaswom filed the suit for recovery of possession of certain property of the defendant. The defendant claimed fixity of tenure over the disputed land as per the provisions of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. Issues Nos. 4 and 5 were framed by the Munsiff. They read as follows:

(2.) What has been done by the Munsiff is clearly illegal and unsustainable. The reference to the Land Tribunal was made under S.125(3) of the K.L.R. Act. Sub-section (6) of S.125 says that the decision of the Land Tribunal on the question referred to shall be deemed to be part of the finding of the civil court and sub-section (5) of S.125 says that after receipt of the finding of the Land Tribunal the civil court shall proceed to decide the suit or other proceedings accepting the decision of the Land Tribunal on the question referred to it. Sub-section (2) of S.125 makes it clear that no order of the Land Tribunal or the Appellate Authority or the Land Board or the Government or an officer of the Government under the K.L.R. Act shall be questioned in any civil court, except as provided in this Act.

(3.) When the civil court referred issue Nos. 4 and 5 to the Land Tribunal the finding entered by the Land Tribunal will form part of the finding of the civil court and the court will refer to the Land Tribunal's decision to decide the case. The person aggrieved by the finding of the Land Tribunal can challenge the same before the Appellate Court. Here the Munsiff has chosen to set aside the order of the Land Tribunal which is not permissible under the law. The reasons given by the Munsiff that the Land Tribunal copied an earlier order and has not adverted to the relevant facts are beside the point. The defendant was at liberty to challenge it before the appellate court. The order passed by the Munsiff is not sustainable and the same is set aside and the court below is directed to proceed with the case in accordance with law after accepting the decision of the Land Tribunal under issue Nos. 4 and 5 in the suit.