ANANTHA KINI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision arises from O.A. 485/73, a proceeding initiated by the petitioner under S.72B. K.L.R. Act.

(2.) The authorities below dismissed the application entering the finding that the tenancy set up by the petitioner is one to which the provisions of Chapter II K.L.R. Act will not apply in view of S.3(1) (vi). I have in my judgment disposing of the connected Second Appeal 467/88 found that the lease in favour of the petitioner is one granted by an absolute owner and if that be the position, the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of Chapter II K.L.R. Act.

(3.) I could have straight away held that the petitioner therefore is entitled to purchase the right, title and interest of the landowner but for the argument of the learned counsel for the contesting respondents that at the relevant time the petitioner admittedly was not in possession of the land and as such he cannot be said to be a cultivating tenant within the meaning of the Act. In support of this argument he made reference to Ext.A3, the agreement dated 15-5-1974 showing that the second respondent admittedly is in possession of the land. The question thus arising for consideration is, whether the petitioner under the circumstances indicated above, is entitled to maintain the petition