SOUTHERN PLANTATIONS LTD Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The questions, that arise for consideration in this O.P.(C) are: (1) Has the buyer, who entered into an agreement for sale with the seller, the right to get impleaded in an application filed by the seller, against the Government, under Section 10 of the Kerala Forests (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Land) Act 2003 (herein after referred to as 'the EFL Act') seeking a decree declaring that the application schedule property is not an ecologically fragile land and to set aside the order passed against the seller. (2) Does an agreement for sale of an immovable property by itself create a charge in favour of the buyer at the inception of the agreement itself, on the seller's interest in the property, to the extent of advance purchase money paid by the buyer under section 55(6)(b) of the Transfer of Property Act.

(2.) The petitioner herein is the applicant in O.A No.5/2009, filed before the Court of the Tribunal for EFL Cases, Kozhikode. The aforesaid O.A was filed, seeking a decree declaring that the application schedule property is not an ecologically fragile land and to set aside the order dated 18.06.2009 passed by the 2nd respondent herein, whereby, 242 acres of land belonging to the petitioner was declared as 'Ecological Fragile Land'. While the aforesaid O.A was pending consideration before the Tribunal, the 3rd respondent herein filed a petition, under Order I, Rule 10 r/w. section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking to get himself impleaded in the said O.A as supplemental 2nd applicant or supplemental 3rd respondent.

(3.) The petitioner herein filed objection contending that the 3rd respondent has no right to get himself impleaded in the said O.A as he has no kind of right or interest in the said property. But the petitioner admitted that there was an agreement for sale, dated 14.09.2004 and the term of agreement expired on 30.09.2005. Since the 3rd respondent was not ready and willing to perform his part of the contract, the sale deed was not executed and the 3rd respondent has not resorted to file a civil suit for specific performance, so far. That apart, though the petitioner had executed a power of attorney in favour of the 3rd respondent, the said power-of-attorney also has expired on 30.09.2005 and it is no longer in force. The 3rd respondent cannot claim any kind of right over the property, either under the agreement for sale or under the power-of attorney, which stands expired.