Kerala High Court
Surprasada Mary vs The State Of Kerala on 30 October, 2024
CRP NO. 1833 OF 1999 1 2024:KER:81067
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.B. SNEHALATHA
WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 8TH KARTHIKA, 1946
CRP NO. 1833 OF 1999
AGAINST THE ORDER IN SM NO.329 OF 1977 OF TALUK LAND
BOARD, CHITTUR
REVISION PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 11 TO 15:
1 SURPRASADA MARY, S/O.PAUL CRUZ,
2 GRACY
W/O SEGBASTIAN,
3 DAVID NELSON (TRANSPOSED AS ADDL R14)
S/0 PAKKYAM
4 JAMES JOHNSON (TRANSPOSED AS ADDL R15)
S/O PAKKYAM
5 ALBERT AMALDAS
S/O PAKKYAM
ALL ARE RESIDING AT KULLARAYANPALAYAM,
PAZHANIYARPALAYAM, KOZHINJAMPARA, CHITTUR
TALUK,PALAKKAD DISTRICT
BY ADVS.
SRI.T.KRISHNAN UNNI (SR.)
SRI.JAMSHEED HAFIZ
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 10 IN S.M:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
CRP NO. 1833 OF 1999 2 2024:KER:81067
2 TALUK LAND BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
CHITTUR P.O, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
3 THE THAHSILDAR,
CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
4 JEEVARATHNAM
WIDOW OF YAGAPPAN
5 JOSEPH (LATE)
S/O YAGAPPAN
6 STANISLAUS(WRONGLY SHOWN AS DHANASILAN IN THE
ORDER IMPUGNED)
S/O YAGAPPAN
7 LILLY PUSHPAM
D/O YAGAPPAN
8 NAYAN MARSHAL
S/O YAGAPPAN
9 WILLIAM MOHANDAS
S/O YAGAPPAN
0 GNANASUNDHARI
D/O YAGAPPAN
11 ELIZABETH SAMBATH KUMARI
D/O YAGAPPAN
12 SAHAYA AGNES
S/O YAGAPPAN
13 JOHN AMALDAS
S/O YAGAPPAN
14 DAVID NELSON (SUPPLEMENTAL ADDL R14)
S/O PAKKYAM
15 JAMES JOHNSON (SUPPLEMENTAL ADDL R15)
S/O PAKKYAM
CRP NO. 1833 OF 1999 3 2024:KER:81067
16 ANNIE JOSEPH
W/O LATE JOSEPH, RESIDING AT GNANI HOUSE,
PALANIYAR PALAYAM P.O, KOZHINJAMPARA,
CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 555.
17 JOSLI
D/O LATE JOSEPH, RESIDING AT GNANI HOUSE,
PALANIYAR PALAYAM P.O,KOZHINJAMPARA,
CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 555.
18 JENI
D/O LATE JOSEPH, RESIDING AT GNANI HOUSE,
PALANIYAR PALAYAM P.O,KOZHINJAMPARA,
CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 555.
(IMPLEADED AS ADDL RESPONDENT NOS.16 TO 18 VIDE
ORDER DATED 25.09.2024 IN I.A NO. 2382/2014
(IA NO.2/2014)
BY ADV SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN SR.
THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 16.10.2024, THE COURT ON 30.10.2024 DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
CRP NO. 1833 OF 1999 4 2024:KER:81067
M.B.SNEHALATHA, J
-------------------------------------------
C.R.P.No.1833 of 1999
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of October, 2024
ORDER
Challenge in this revision petition is the order dated
28.11.1998 of Taluk Land Board, Chittur in S.M.329/1977.
2. S.M.329/1977 is a ceiling case initiated with respect
to the properties held by one Yagappan namely the assessee in
the said case. Revision petitioners are respondents 11 to 15
before the Taluk Land Board and according to them, they are the
assignees of certain properties from Narayanaswami Iyer who got
those properties by way of assignment from one Yagappan.
3. The legal heirs of the assessee put forward a
contention that the family of the assessee belongs to Vannia
Christians governed by Hindu Mitakshara law and the properties
are ancestral property.
4. By the impugned order, Taluk Land Board upheld the
CRP NO. 1833 OF 1999 5 2024:KER:81067
said contention and the ceiling limit was determined considering
the rights of a joint family consisting of 15 members.
5. Revision petitioners in this revision petition dispute
the character of the property in the hands of the deceased
assessee in the ceiling case. Their case is that a competent civil
court namely Sub Court, Palakkad in O.S.No.440/1993 has
already found that the property in question is the self-acquisition
of the assessee. Though an appeal was filed against the said
judgment and decree as A.S.No.543/1999 before this Court, the
said appeal was subsequently withdrawn and thus the finding in
O.S.No.440/1993 of Sub Court, Palakkad that the property in
question is the self-acquisition of the assessee has become final.
6. It is the case of the revision petitioners that the Taluk
Land Board rendered the impugned order with a finding that the
properties are ancestral property without taking into account the
judgment and decree of the competent civil court that the
property in question is the self-acquired property of the assessee.
According to the revision petitioners, the finding of the Taluk Land
Board that the property is ancestral property will adversely affect
their rights in the property.
CRP NO. 1833 OF 1999 6 2024:KER:81067
7. Heard the learned counsel for the revision
petitioners and the learned Government Pleader.
8. It is an admitted case that during the pendency of
S.M.329/1977 before the Taluk Land Board, a suit as O.S.
No.440/1993 was filed before the Sub Court, Palakkad by the sons
of Yagappan against the revision petitioners herein. The learned
counsel for the revision petitioners pointed out that the pendency
of the civil suit before the Sub Court, Palakkad involving the very
same property had been brought to the notice of Taluk Land
Board which is evident from the impugned order dated
28.11.1998 of Taluk Land Board (page 20 of the impugned
judgment).
9. According to the learned counsel for the revision
petitioners, the Taluk Land Board ought to have taken into
account the finding in O.S.No.440/1993 of Sub Court, Palakkad
that the property is the individual acquisition of Yagappan.
10. The learned Government Pleader also submitted that
the matter requires reconsideration by the Taluk Land Board for
which the matter has to be remitted to the Taluk Land Board.
11. In the light of the submissions made by both sides
CRP NO. 1833 OF 1999 7 2024:KER:81067
and also taking into account the fact that while passing the
impugned order in S.M.329/1977 by the Taluk Land Board with a
finding that the properties are ancestral property of the assessee,
the Taluk Land Board has not considered the judgment and decree
of the civil court in O.S.No.440/1993 of Sub Court, Palakkad, the
impugned order dated 28.11.1998 in S.M.329/1977 of Taluk Land
Board, Chittur stands set aside and the matter is remitted to the
Taluk Land Board, Chittur to reconsider the matter afresh taking
into account the finding of the Sub Court, Palakkad in
O.S.No.440/1993 regarding the character of the property and also
by granting an opportunity of hearing of all the persons
interested.
Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand closed.
Sd/-
M.B.SNEHALATHA,
JUDGE
ab
