K BHAGIRATHI G SHENOY Vs. K P BALLAKURAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether a lease is of land appurtenant to a building or vice-versa continues to remain an issue providing pabulum for many a litigation. In the instant case also that issue has assumed decisive dimension. Our efforts to have this case settled out of court did not fructify despite the active role played by counsel on both sides. So, we have to determine this issue on the facts of this case.

(2.) This case reached the Supreme Court after drifting through a long stream of vissitudes. Genesis of this litigation is traced to a lease created during pre-independence days when one of the two buildings situated in the disputed property was rented out its owner, (a bureaucrat then stationed at Delhi) to one Somappa Naik. On 28.7.1951 a new lease deed was executed by the said Somappa Naik in respect of the disputed property having an area of 1.06 acres containing the same pucca residential building thereon, for a monthly rent of Rs.9/-. When the lessee continued under the lease he assigned his rights in favour of the present respondent (who is a practicing advocate of Kassargod District Court) on 17.8.1968.

(3.) When Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (for short "the Act") came into force the respondent filed an application before the land Tribunal, Kassargod in 1964 as per S.72B of the Act for assigning to him the right, title and interest of the landowner, claiming that he is a cultivating tenant of the disputed land. Despite resistance made by the appellant (landowner) the said application was allowed by the Land Tribunal, but the Appellate, Authority remitted the case back to the Land Tribunal for fresh consideration and disposal. The Land Tribunal again allowed the application and when appellant appealed, the Appellate Authority confirmed the order.