AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
V. Chitambaresh, J.—Two persons by name Mayandi and Chammunni claimed tenancy in respect of parcels of land included in the account of the declarant in a ceiling case before the Taluk Land Board. Mayandi and Chammunni relied on certificates of purchase bearing Nos. 201/1972 and 176/1972 issued by the Land Tribunal, Chittur. The Taluk Land Board refused to act on the certificates of purchase and treated the holding as one belonging to the declarant himself. Consequently a final order was passed determining the extent and identity of the lands liable to be surrendered by the declarant in the ceiling case. Mayandi and Chammunni unsuccessfully challenged the orders of the Taluk Land Board in C.R.P Nos. 884/1979 and 908/1979 on the file of this Court. The Civil Revision Petitions were dismissed and the same was also affirmed by the Supreme Court by order dated 27-9-1983 in S.L.P No.8401/1981.
The son of Mayandi and the widow of Chammunni later filed applications purporting to be u/s 85(8) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. They sought to set aside the earlier order of the Taluk Land Board in so far as it relates to the lands covered by the certificates of purchase. The Taluk Land Board has by the order impugned rejected their claim applications which is challenged in this Civil Revision Petition u/s 103 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act.
Firstly, the predecessors in interest of the petitioners were very much parties to the proceedings of the Taluk Land Board. The petitioners cannot therefore invoke Section 85(8) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. Such power can be invoked only if the petitioners or their predecessors were not heard earlier. I hold that the very petition filed by the petitioners before the Taluk Land Board is not maintainable.
Secondly, the certificates of purchase now pressed into service were relied on by the predecessors-in-interest of the petitioners. this Court as well as the Supreme Court refused to act on those certificates of purchase. The Taluk Land Board cannot now be faulted with for not giving credence to those certificates of purchase. The claim of the petitioners is barred by the principles of constructive resjudicata also. The Taluk Land Board has not decided any question of law erroneously as to warrant interference u/s 103 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act.
The Civil Revision Petitions fail and are dismissed.